Letters to the Editor 2 2005-09-16
Maurice Nelligan has publicly criticised the Equality Authority for using scarce resources to deal with the Portmarnock Golf Club case.
With respect, Mr Nelligan, as a member of Dún Laoghaire Golf Club, might serve the public better if he sought answers to questions concerning the level of the taxpayers subsidy for the development of the new golf course at Ballyman. It would appear this could amount to tens, if not hundreds of millions of euros. Dún Laoghaire, like Portmarnock, is a private members golf club.
M Kelly
Monkstown, Co Dublin.
Missing files
I wonder if it is possible that I have stumbled onto the Department of Health's method of reducing waiting lists? Earlier this summer two people were hospitalised for a considerable period of time in the Midwest Regional Hospital, Limerick. They were due to be called back within three weeks for further procedures. However when both contacted the hospital unexpectedly their files could not be located. In fact no records could be found of a man's three-week stay in the hospital, despite having been billed for same. Are files being pulled in order to disguise the true state of the waiting lists?
Could your magazine manage to find out why it has taken more than five months to fix a radiotherapy machine in the Cork University Hospital?
Anne Lucey
Cork
Ripping off social capital
There is a link between the Eddie Hobbs critique and the David Putnam critique, in the form of a common "dog that didn't bark": added value on land rezoning. Under current procedures this belongs to the landowner, and is consequently a serious source of political corruption, as exposed in various Tribunals. I wonder why Hobbs was not on to this? It is the ultimate rip-off, given that the added value, which is usually substantial, is totally due to the proximity of prior social investment.
This problem is going to have to be addressed, under the pressure of the increasing scarcity and price of fossil fuel. We will need to plan for compact communities in walking distance of retail outlets, and networking these village communities with a reliable public transport system. In such communities, one tends to know one's neighbours, thus enhancing the Putnam social capital.
Under current legislation, might it perhaps be possible for the local authority to do Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) on land adjacent to existing settlements prior to re-zoning, to re-zone, and then to lease the re-zoned land to a variety of users as part of a compact-community development plan? The added value would then accrue to the community rather than to the land-owners, provided the rental reflected the rezoning added-value, in a manner consistent with the planning objectives.
Issues relating to local government structure, and to local taxation, also present themselves in this context.
Might these processes lend themselves to a Hobbs-type rip-off analysis, supplemented by constructive alternatives?
Roy H W Johnston
Rathmines, Dublin 6
Scrapping article 41.2
The Irish Human Rights Commission ( IHRC) has called for the repeal of Article 41.2 of the Constitution (which guarantees to protect the role of women in the home) as outdated. At first glance this seems to be a good idea. As the IHRC points out, this Article seems to cast "women as home makers and mothers – what they describe as a dependent role". Only the most Neanderthal amongst us would wish to have women "barefoot and pregnant" as it were. Yet, the IHRC is less clear about what might be put in its place.
At the time the Constitution was drafted, one salary per household was the norm. Prices – whether of weekly groceries or a new house – were based accordingly. Since then a major social change has taken place. Now, two salaries (or one and a half!) are the norm. Having both partners of a family working was originally intended to help make ends meet better. Of course, it was also because perhaps both partners wanted to expand their careers – fair enough. But it didn't take shops and builders long to catch on there were now two salaries per household from which to draw – and prices went up accordingly. The little bit extra soon became the standard requisite for day-to-day living.
Then, with both parents working, a new problem emerged – the exorbitant cost of childcare. Most of that extra salary gets gobbled up in crèches and so on, but you'll still need both for what before would have required only one. Anyone wishing to opt out of this rat-race is at a serious disadvantage. They'll struggle to buy their groceries, and most likely will never be able to afford a house. Now I'm not suggesting that it is only women who should stay at home. Many men might like to raise their kids themselves rather than farm them out to paid strangers – who, however well-intentioned, cannot have more concern for the child than its own parents.
If Article 41.2 is scrapped and nothing put in its place, parents who currently have some sort of Constitutional basis for state aid will find they have none. The IHRC suggests that Article 41.2 casts women in a dependent role (ie having no income of their own). Why not then, suggest that the spirit of Article 41.2 be truly invoked, and that every housewife should get paid a salary in recognition of the very real work they do – work, by the way, that is essential to the future of the State, as Article 41.2 acknowledges. If this is not possible, a raft of incentives could be put in place to ensure both parents did not need to work outside the home to raise their families. This would remove any dependency at a stroke, and give effect to what this Article promises.
As things stand in this state at present, the position of many parents both having to work in order to have a roof over their heads means this article is being breached. The Government would be delighted to see it go, relieving it in one stroke of its Constitutional responsibilities to the family. The IHRC would merely be scoring its own goal.
Nick Folley
Carrigaline, Co. Cork.
Inquest into death of Ludlow
The revelations from the second inquest into the killing of Seamus Ludlow in Dundalk in 1976 are deeply disturbing. Retired Detective Inspector John Courtney confirmed what the Ludlow family had long suspected: that the gardaí were told the identities of his killers (loyalists with British Intelligence links) but failed to act. No convictions, no charges, no arrests, no extradition of the suspects or even interviews with them.
Even worse, the Ludlow family was told that Seamus was killed by the IRA for being an informer, thus greatly adding to their grief and dividing the family for many years. To cap it all, none of the family was even informed of the first inquest.
When this is added to the failures of the investigations into the Dublin and Monaghan, Dundalk, Clones and Belturbet bombings, which relatives of the victims believe were also perpetrated by loyalists with British links, it is clear that deficiencies in the gardaí extend well beyond Donegal and did not start in the 1990s. If effective action had been taken by politicians earlier, the Donegal fiasco may not have occurred. But then, maybe the politicians didn't want to take effective action; maybe they still don't?
Dr Sean Marlow
Dublin 11
In the Dark
In 1980 Alvin Toffler pondered what would happen when some religious cults (religious hucksters, as he called them) organised for political purposes, and that second world leaders were unprepared to cope with them. (The Third Wave, Alvin Toffler.)
Today, religio-politics is alive and well and favoured by some political leaders. God's representatives see themselves as above the law; are convinced that God wants them to be rich; have delusional beliefs that they are on a mission to fight their version of evil, and let us not forget that Hitler, the Austrian Catholic, regarded those of Jewish faith as evil.
They are convinced that Armageddon will come on their watch. Of course, Republican President, Ronald Reagan, had the same Messianic outlook and fought the evil empire of the Soviet Union with the help of Afghan mujahedeen who were trained and funded by America. But today they are known as jihadis, and they have turned their guns on American forces in Iraq. The irony of it.
Religion is the biggest money-making and tax-free business in America today. The leading guru of the Christian Evangelist movement has a following of 1,000,000 happy clappy souls who seem to believe that salvation comes through donation. He recently sought the assassination of a world leader and the outrage barely evoked a response at the highest level; a remark that should score high on the richter scale, but now almost forgotten. I think we are in for the dark, metaphorically and physically speaking. Toffler, thou shouldst be living at this hour.
M Lyder
Dartry, Dublin 6
Limerick republicans
I find the letter from Des Long (Village 26 August) in which he encourages "all genuine and faithful republicans to attend the hunger strike commemoration" quite puzzling. What is the Limerick Republican Information Service? As someone living in Limerick I have not heard of this Service. Is Des Long no longer Vice President of RSF? Is he still a member of RSF? If not why not? Would Des Long or anyone else care to shed any light on the issue?
Ray Foley
Limerick City
Parnell and crime
In a reply to my previous letter regarding Charles Stewart Parnell, your correspondent Conor J McKinney (Letters, 9 September) opined that Republican Sinn Féin is not "fit to lick his [Parnell's] boots".
However, as I pointed out in my previous letter, we are not in the 'boot-licking' business: Parnell's or anyone else's. I listed three reasons in my earlier letter as to why we are not enamoured with CS Parnell:
1) his use of militant republicanism when it suited him and his disowning of same when it suited;
2) his use of his political position to favour his lover's husband;
3) his involvement, for personal financial gain, in an act of colonisation with Cecil Rhodes.
Not only did McKinney completely ignore the above three points in his reply last week, but he compounded the error by stating that Parnell's "actions were always above reproach". Except, presumably, for points 1, 2 and 3.
Finally, Conor McKinney stated, again, that: "republicanism does indeed have a despicable history", thus insinuating that this island has witnessed 836 years of "crime". Was Parnell involved in this criminality, McKinney?
PS: Regarding the letter which you were good enough to publish for me (9 September) I would appreciate if you could correct the term you inserted in same during your editing process, describing 'the Six Counties' (my words) as 'Northern Ireland' (your words). Thank you.
John Horan (PRO)
Comhairle Ceantair Atha Cliath
Republican Sinn Fein,
Teach Daithi O Conaill,
223 Parnell Street,
Dublin 1.
Ireland's greatest ever struggle
As a brief comment on the ongoing debate on the role of the government in supporting the Irish language, might it be possible to raise a few points?
Why does the State subsidising of the Irish language raise so many hackles when state subsidising of other projects (some entirely unwholesome, such as the Shannon Airport fiasco) are scarcely frowned upon by these same commentators?
Why is outrage the response upon hearing of the Government's desire to reduce support for the language when a more intelligent response would be to save it via learning it?
How can Irish people describe themselves thus, when they cannot even speak their own language? The current situation is akin to travelling to France to find them all saying how French they are – in English.
Are there any sociologists out there who can link post-colonial shame to an active hatred of the pre-colonial language?
How can people who cannot find the time to set aside half an hour a day, or a few night courses in the language, find the time for Eastenders etc? This may sound petty, but it is from such small acorns that mighty oaks grow.
Why do events, such as the recent plan mooted to scrap gardaí Irish-language training, meet with dismay? How can teaching Irish to the gardaí compensate for public ignorance of the language anyway?
Having created a history steeped in the struggle for independence, what is it we have won? If it speaks English – it is English. The only significant act of self-determination an Irish person can do in a country moulded by foreign culture is a cultural one. The Irish language is not some nationalistic ornament, it is as vital as any other European language, older than most indeed, and provides us with our own, unique idiom. Lest we forget, we speak English owing to past coercion – not historical choice. And so long as we speak it to the detriment of Irish, we will continue to be a colony.
I am not a member of any political group – I am neither a British nor an Irish nationalist, neither do I indulge the policies of the various political groups that litter the island. However, having travelled through Europe, I have an acute sense of the importance of one's own culture. I think, and I'm sure many of your readers will agree, that the Irish language is the keystone of Irish culture.
The government can legislate all it likes on whether or not the indigenous culture of this island ought to persist. But it is the people of this island who, as always, will determine whether or not it vanishes. The fate of the language is in the hands of us all – not just a few politicians.
What are we going to do about it? It goes without saying that it is the most important struggle the Irish have ever faced. Because now it is not economics or politics that are at stake – but who we are.
Ray Foley
Limerick City
Violence in Belfast
I was looking at Questions and Answers on 12 September 2005 and I was appalled at the answers that both Seamus Brennan and Enda Kenny gave to the question about the violence in Belfast. Seamus Brennan called for IRA decommissioning. Enda Kenny said that the perpetrators were left out under the Good Friday Agreement. No call for the Ulster Volunteer Force to decommission its weapons or for the Ulster Defence Association to declare that its war was over. And yet it was these men, backed by their allies in the Orange Order – not the IRA – who over the past few days turned parts of Belfast into "Beirut".
Is mise le meas
Seán Brosnan
Dingle Co Kerry
Farmers have had enough
In recent months, the problem of uninvited visitors coming on to farmland has been highlighted in the media. We have heard of people walking across land, making gaps in ditches, leaving gates open, trampling through corn, passing through fields of livestock (sometimes with dogs) and putting themselves at risk of attack from cows and bulls.
These people have no idea of the damage they do, and couldn't care less. When they have gone, there are cattle in neighbours' corn or sheep that have become so excitable that they could ultimately lose lambs. It can cost the farmer days to try and put everything right again.
There is an even greater problem though – the fox hunting people – and it surprises me that more emphasis isn't being put on the trail of destruction they leave behind them. The farmers who have seen dozens of horses tearing up land and leaving gaps in ditches as well as packs of hounds terrorising livestock will be familiar with the magnitude of the problem.
With their hounds and hooters, the hunters are the most arrogant people one could meet. Generally, they never ask permission to enter and if a farmer asks them to leave or tries to prevent them from encroaching on his land, he gets bad-mannered abuse – even from so-called ladies with gutter mouths. If the farmer sends a bill to the hunters, they generally do not pay because there are solicitors and members of the judiciary riding with them. They are a law unto themselves.
In this compensation-ridden society of ours, even a farmer who succeeded in winning a court action against a hunt could be ruined by the excessive cost of the proceedings. So the best and easiest way forward for the farmer is to refuse everybody access to his farm.
Everywhere one goes, there are charges for car parking, for example, or to use another person's property in any way. But no one is paying the farmer for the recreational use of his land. The farmer has everything to lose by allowing his property to be used as a freebie.
There is an agreed set of rules with the IFA and sporting organisations and the Masters of Foxhounds Association has signed up to this. The rules state that people are obliged to seek the property owner's permission before entering on to his land. If the farmer refuses permission, such people must abide by his wishes and stay out. The IFA has a clear obligation to all its members to ensure that the rules of the agreement are observed and implemented in their entirety.
Ninety per cent of farmers do not want trespassers and vandals on their lands and it would greatly help the landowner in the present climate if the Government would now, as in England, Scotland and Wales, ban fox hunting. Irish farmers will no longer tolerate what happened in the past. We croppies will not lie down!
Philip Lynch
Farmers against Foxhunting and Trespass