Eoin Hayes: The cover-up is more damaging than the ‘crime’
Eoin Hayes addressing the media
They were probably expecting some soft media coverage. After a phenomenal election in which their seat count rose from six to eleven, the Social Democrats were introducing their new TDs on the Leinster House plinth. Among those new TDs was Eoin Hayes, a dark horse in the competitive Dublin Bay South constituency, and former employee of Palantir, having left them in 2017.
Palantir is a software company that uses AI to help armies choose their targets, and is unapologetic about its partnership with the Israeli Defence Forces to do so in Gaza. The Social Democrats have been vocal in their opposition to the war in Gaza, but does it really matter that one of their new TDs worked for the organisation almost a decade ago?
It turns out that yes, it does. Because Eoin Hayes was given shares as part of his compensation, and there was a question mark over when he divested those shares, and as such whether he may have profited indirectly from the war.
Journalist Craig Hughes of the Irish Daily Mail broke the story, and has accused the Social Democrats of hypocrisy, given their stated position that inaction is akin to complicity when it comes to the war in Israel. For a party that prides itself on holding the moral high ground, that was embarrassing, but worse was to come.
In an excruciating press conference, Hayes was asked 23 times when he divested and how much he made. His answers were evasive, but on one point he was unequivocal - he divested his shares before he went into politics. His party colleagues Gary Gannon and Cian O’Callaghan backed him up on this. He repeatedly claimed that he was being transparent.
Just an hour or so later it emerged that this was not the case. Eoin Hayes divested his shares in July 2024, one month after his election to Dublin City Council and eight months into Israel’s war on Gaza.
The information Hayes gave journalists, and - by extension - the electorate was incorrect, and not only this but he had made liars of his party colleagues as well. Hypocrisy compounded by [apparent] lies… this is the stuff the Social Democrats enjoy calling out - not what they usually make headlines for.
For two days, headlines on the scandal continued while the party should have still been on a victory lap after a successful election, overshadowing government formation talks. Left-wing colleagues are calling for Hayes to resign his seat, claiming he never would have won it if the public had known.
The Social Democrats suspended Hayes immediately, and did not specify a timeline for the lifting of the suspension. He will sit as an Independent when the Dáil convenes.
A red card, and the Social Democrats are down to 10 players on the field before the starting whistle has even blown.
Communications 101: Don’t drag out the story
How could the Social Democrats have handled this better? Well, first things first, they need to scrutinise and vet their candidates more thoroughly. This was Hayes’ second election with the party, there is no excuse for them not to have known about this and dealt with it long before it became a scandal.
Their second mistake was to ignore Craig Hughes. The press conference was not his first attempt to address the issue - he had already contacted the party on several occasions and given them the opportunity to clarify what happened and had been rebuffed. This was a crucial missed opportunity to clarify the situation with Hayes and release a statement on their own terms.
And that led to the disastrous press conference. The Social Democrats are somewhat used to being media darlings, with few scandals since their foundations. As a result, perhaps, they seemed at a loss as to how to deal with an adversarial journalist. More experienced media spokespersons would have been able to move on to another topic, or even end the press conference earlier than planned to avoid the painful, prolonged exchange that ensued.
The benefits of media training for those in the limelight have never been more clear.
