Villagers: Letters to the Editor 2005-11-10

Cost benefit analysis is important because it estimates all the costs and benefits of a project to society. According to Emma Browne in last week's Village (3-9 November) the Department of Finance told Village that under Finance Guidelines a cost benefit analysis of the runway proposal should have been done. Minister Cullen stated in the Dáil in June that the Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) told him it had conformed to the Guidelines.

United Portmarnock Residents Opposing Another Runway (UPROAR) was sceptical because we could not find any cost benefit analysis through Freedom of Information requests. We asked the Ombudsman to investigate and received a reply dated 26 October 2005. We analyse that reply in our letter to Brian Cowen dated 1 November. (See both documents at www.norunway.com)

The Department of Transport believes that a cost benefit analysis was carried out, but (curiously) told the Ombudsman it would not ask to see it. So, if the Department of Finance says a cost benefit analysis should have been done and the Department of Transport believes it has been done, where is it? What are the results? What are the benefits and costs of the various options considered? Is the parallel runway proposal the best economic option?

UPROAR did its own rough estimates. We found that the total cost of this runway at Dublin Airport would be about €3 billion (not the €141 million claimed) if the true value of public land used for the runway and the cost of the private land devalued by the new flightpath were included, together with other costs such as construction, operation, extra road traffic congestion and the loss of amenity to local communities, through noise, pollution, etc.

This €3 billion should be repaid out of the earnings from extra passengers using the new runway. UPROAR estimated that 30 years worth of such earnings would be below €100 million. That means a waste of €2.9 billion of public and private assets. UPROAR estimates that a new airport for the Dublin Region could be built for about €2 billion yielding a healthy return of 7.4 per cent. (See: Cost Benefit Analysis and The Value of Land at Dublin Airport at www.norunway.com)

We asked the Minister for Finance, who has recently placed a lot of emphasis on value for money, to investigate. As he is also the Dublin Airport Authority's principal shareholder, he might ask the DAA for this elusive cost benefit analysis. If inadequate, or nonexistent, he should commission an independent analysis, which would, we expect, confirm UPROAR's rough, but probably robust estimates for the Dublin Airport site and for a new airport alternative.

Matthew Harley, United Portmarnock Residents Opposing Another Runway (UPROAR)

 

 

Sexual abuse in the Catholic Church - No lions allowed in the hierarchy

Bishops knew that they were emasculated and muzzled and the mantra was omerta. Rome had spoken – no change in the agenda – dogma was dogma and, as someone said, you cannot change an old dog's dogma.

They knew that they would become outcasts for speaking the truth but then, truth was in danger. But surely a man does what he must in spite of oppression and obstacles and that is the basis of morality. One priest did speak up and he claimed that bishops were merely attendants at the throne and voiceless (No Lions in the Hierarchy by Fr Joe Dunne). So is the bishops' job just to keep the paper moving? But if the decision makers continue to be the keepers of the house, who will watch the watchman and what if he sleeps on his watch like St. Peter.

Finally, if women are the pillars of the house, the keystone of the arch, and without them the Church would crumble, they have not been very vocal. They are still silent when their homosexual children are deemed "ordered to an intrinsic moral evil" and a danger to society – terms which could cause them to be murdered. The newly elected Pope lost no time discussing the sin of Sodom even though biblical scholars claim that the destruction of Sodom was caused by an eruption of subterranean gases.

Marie Lyder, Dartry, Dublin 6

 

 

The crisis in the Church

The Catholic Church might appear to be facing its gravest and most desperate hour. Not so. Historian JF Loughlin of the Catholic Encyclopaedia wrote of the challenges that confronted Pope Adrian VI upon his investiture in the 16th Century: "His Holiness had to reform a court that thrived on corruption, and detested the name of reform."

In his first major address to his Christian flock, Pope Adrian launched a scathing attack on the Christian Church, which was rocked by scandals of all sorts. He declared: "So much has vice become the accepted norm that those who are polluted are no longer aware of the stench. I ask you, my brethren, where will it end?"

He warned that if God permitted the persecution of the Church it was because of the sins of men and especially those of prelates and clergy. Among the sins that Adrian listed was sexual abuse of children by men of the cloth. The Pontiff thundered: "This accursed malady has spread from the head to all the members…from the common worshipper to the Church Hierarchy. God will be avenged."

He reminded mass-goers throughout the Christian world that Christ himself had denounced child abuse as the most atrocious crime against God and humanity.

Pope Adrian had inherited from his predecessor, Pope Leo X what clerical historian Fr Philip Hughes called a Church poisoned and torn apart by "a rotten mass of parasites, prostitutes, perverts, bravos and bullies."

Pope Leo had punished trespassers on his ten square mile game reserve near Rome by having their hands and feet cut off, their homes burned down, and their children sold off as servants. But he never raised a whisper against rampant sexual abuse among clergy and lay Catholics alike that cried out for justice.

During successive pontificates, over many centuries, a blind eye was turned against child sexual abuse because it just didn't register as a wrongdoing in the way that other moral transgressions, including far less serious ones, did.

For some strange and sinister reason, the Church Hierarchy throughout the ages has either condoned, evaded, or gone into denial about sexual abuse. Pope Adrian was among the precious few pontiffs who took a tough stand against sexual abuse, but even he couldn't stamp it out among clergy who just couldn't resist the temptation to abuse defenceless children.

Bear in mind too that up to the 17th century, the Catholic Church in many European countries not only permitted, but encouraged, the castration of choir boys to improve the quality of their singing at mass. Was that not a form of child abuse? It certainly involved a reckless disregard for the victims of this cruel practice.

At a far earlier period of Church history, St Augustine warned that there would be scandals in the church "till the end of time", and stressed that Christ himself had issued a similar warning to his disciples.

The great Cardinal Newman frequently reminded his fellow clergy and lay Catholics that it was always better to endure the shame and punishment that resulted from exposure of a sexual crime than to conceal the crime.

"Confess it now. Cry halt. Intervene and protect", he cautioned, "do not sink deeper into a pit of degradation and horror by remaining silent and acquiescent. Your silence will make you an accessory to that unspeakable predation of God's little ones". In other words, don't cover up child sexual abuse.

If only the Church had heeded this advice.

Richard Power, Ballyneety, Co Limerick

 

 

Rights of the child

A useful first step for the Vatican/The Holy See would be to sign the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) under article 34 of which "all State parties undertake to protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and abuse" and "for these purposes... take all appropriate national and bilateral and multi lateral measures."

The Vatican/Holy See is a State recognised internationally and located in Europe, and has the duties of such a State. It would be a party to UN conventions and covenants such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child, like other civilised European countries. And it should bring laws (in particular Canon Law) in to line with human rights instruments.

David Noble, Dun Laoghaire, Dublin

 

 

Hill of Tara - Tunes for Tara

I have just returned from Germany and Switzerland where I spent a few days touring with the Irish Folk Festival which is dedicated to preservation of the integrity of the Hill of Tara. This is an annual five week touring festival of 30 concerts, organised by Magnetic Music, the leading Celtic music agency in Germany, which is owned and managed by my husband, Petr Pandula. This festival has been running for 31 years and has featured many well renowned Irish artists such as Altan, Clannad, De Danann to name just a few. This year the festival features Solas, Beoga, Kevin Burke, Ged Foley and Alan Burke.

The Magnetic Music team decided to take the step of using the festival to register a musical protest over the construction of the M3 motorway so close to Tara. The festival motto is 'Tunes for Tara'. At the end of each concert a seven minute multivision slide show portrays the beautiful scenery of Tara and illustrates the proximity of the proposed route of the M3 in diagrammatic form.

Audiences are invited to sign the petition registering their objection to the current proposal. I was absolutely staggered at the numbers of signatures we collected. At the end of week one of concerts we had collected over one thousand.

I was ashamed and embarrassed to be constantly asked by concert-goers (some who were frequent visitors to Ireland and others who are potential tourists) to explain why Irish people are going to passively allow this development to happen when there appears to be a viable alternative? As another letter writer mentioned (Village, 8 October), societies are judged not only by what they create, but also what they choose not to destroy. I certainly don't feel proud to be answering those questions to some of our astonished European neighbours. Surely there is still time to reconsider the decision to compromise the integrity of this unique part of our heritage.

Mary Pandula, Dundrum, Dublin

 

 

Immigration in Ireland - Green cards

Recently the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment announced the introduction of a Green Card for migrant workers in Ireland. Indeed, the coverage of the Minister's comments are very welcome as he has promised new legislation and regulations that will allow migrants workers to remain permanently in the state, with automatic rights for family members to come to Ireland. However, on reading the text of the proposed Employment Permits Bill 2005, much of the Minister's predictions are not outlined in its actual content. Minister Martin has responded to this by indicating that the measures will be addressed in further legislation and/or regulations and that this will happen in due course. Whilst we welcome an indication that this may happen, we have concerns about the actual Bill being debated in the Dáil does not address these very issues.

We have huge concern also, that the fast track route to permanency for migrant workers on Green Cards which the Minister has discussed will not be part of the actual Bill going through the Dáil. When you read the content of the future Bill, it is clear that the Green Card system being proposed bears no resemblance to the true Green Card system as commonly understood by Irish people – particularly anyone familiar with the US system. In the United States, Green Cards confer rights and entitlements upon the holder commensurate with those of the long-stay migrant. They both confer and recognise the principle of permanence. The text of the Bill being debated at the moment provides 'higher skilled' workers with permission to work for a minimum of two years (and possibly longer at the discretion of the Minister) effectively placing the current working visa/authorisation schemes on a statutory footing. The Bill itself does not introduce permission to work for five years and automatic rights to family reunification and the result of this is that again we are treating migrant workers as economic units, eager for their contribution to our economy but singularly failing to accept that they may wish to settle permanently here.

Also, despite the Minister's statements about improved family reunification rights for higher-skilled migrant workers, the actual Bill does not contain any provisions regarding the family reunification rights of Green Card holders. It is not clear under what procedures family members will be allowed to join the migrants here, or for how long, and whether or not they will have the right to work when they arrive. Nor is it clear if holders of the new Green Cards will be allowed to have wider family members simply visit them in Ireland for short periods. All of these issues will affect how attractive Ireland is as a country of immigration to highly mobile, high-skilled workers and their families.

The Bill addresses the situation whereby work permits are held by employers instead of employees to a degree. It proposes that employment permits will be issued to and held by the worker, with a copy provided to the employer. However, while this is certainly a step in the right direction, the changes proposed in the Bill do not go far enough because while the employee may be issued with the work permit, (s)he still cannot apply for the permit in his/her own right as the employer must still apply for it on their behalf. Only workers who qualify for the two year employment permit (Green Card) will be allowed to apply for their own permit and this does not represent a change from the current system. The Immigration Council of Ireland (ICI) is very concerned that this still does not provide the worker with ownership of their labour and the result is that concerns about worker exploitation remain.

The ICI welcomes some aspects of the proposed Employment Permits Bill, as the provisions will greatly increase levels of transparency and clarity in current administrative procedures regarding the issue of permission to work in the State and will target exploitative practices of employers which are designed to increase protections for migrant workers.

However, the differences between text of the actual Bill and the comments by the Minister in recent times have led to unnecessary confusion for all concerned, not least for migrants themselves who are unclear about what changes, if any, they will see in terms of their rights with the introduction of this Bill. If the improvements being promised by the Minister for Enterprise are introduced later either through regulations or further legislation we will very much welcome them, however based on the Bill that is available to us now, it is unclear when or if those improvements will ever be put in place.

Denise Charlton, Chief Executive, Immigrant Council of Ireland 2 Andrew Street, Dublin 2

 

 

Media inaccuracy - Penalties for the press

The sensational and ill-informed press coverage of Liam Lawlor's recent death has once again prompted debate on media accountability. One problem is the use of unnamed sources, making it difficult for the readership to assess the likely accuracy of the quotes.

It is interesting to note the different headlines dealing with the robbery, last March, of a Securicor van near Dublin. The Irish Times (15 March) headline ran "Dublin based criminal gang is blamed for €2m robbery" while the Irish Daily Mirror of the same date proclaimed "IRA strike again – Gardaí blame Provo gang for €4m heist". What was going on here? Both papers cited "senior Garda sources" as their font of information. Either these unnamed "senior Garda sources" were telling different papers different things or one of these papers was making things up as they went along.

Veteran journalist Simon Hoggart has pointed out that such unnamed sources must be treated with the greatest caution, since they do not want to be held accountable for the information they disseminate. A second problem is the so-called 'trial by media' whereby a person's reputation may be ruined even after the Courts find them innocent of the charges brought against them. Newspapers have a responsibility here not to present someone as guilty before a verdict is delivered, and to apologise suitably should they wrong someone. While this is sometimes true, the apology is often tucked away in one or two column inches, deep inside the newspaper.

I suspect that some papers may even calculatedly factor any potential libel claims into increased sales following a suitably scandalous headline.

I propose two changes: firstly, the end of using unnamed sources and spurious surveys. Secondly, apologies should occupy the same position and use the same font size as the original article mentioned. Thus, a front page headline that is subsequently proven to be incorrect should be followed up with a front page retraction, even if this means the paper has to push the main news story to the second page. This, in itself, imposes a financial penalty in possibly reducing sales with the added benefit that the reliability of the publication becomes evident to its readership. These two steps should not be a matter for self-regulation, but enforced by legislation.

Nick Folley, Carrigaline, Co Cork

 

 

The legal profession - Solicitors' conflict of interest

The Law Society both regulates and represents solicitors, and stipulates that it is unprofessional and punishable for solicitors to enter into a conflict of interest.

The Law Society itself however exists in such an extreme conflict of interests as one could possibly imagine ie regulating and representing solicitors.

That leaves us served by a profession that is "regulated" by a party that is in complete conflict with its own fundamentals.

Brendan Hegarty

Letterkenny, Co Donegal

Response to Anthony Coughlan

Multi-tiered Europe

The factual selectivity of Dr Anthony Coughlan (Village, 3-9 November) regarding Europe has always been wondrous to behold. From the very start, in 1948, the European 'project' has always been not just two-tiered – but multi-tiered. Not all European countries were in the Council of Europe. Not all were in NATO (some still are not). For nearly two decades, the European Coal and Steel Community, and then the EEC, aka Common Market, only had six members. Only last year, did some ten countries finally join the European Union (of 15 – and there are still more outside).

Within the EU – in 2005 – 13 of the 25 countries are not in the euro zone, and have their own currencies. The UK and (because of the UK) Ireland are not members of Schengen. Attached to every one of the Treaties which Dr Coughlan has manfully opposed and which the Irish electorate has ratified, is a clutch of protocols and opt-outs and transitional arrangements which create a series of special zones - or mini-tiers. 'Enhanced co-operation' can only be undertaken by member states (my italics) and whatever the Commission or some of its members might like to dream about, it is only consenting Governments that can 'do' it. So, even if Dr. Coughlan did time his letter for Hallowe'en, his scare is a very damp squib. That having been said: Dr Coughlan is quite correct to draw our attention to the 'enhanced co-operation'option. Not only does it exist but, when and if Germany and France sort out their little internal domestic problems, we can expect to see it very much on the agenda – particularly if the full 25 Member Constitutional Treaty is long-fingered. We might even see Prime Minister Gordon Brown unveiling such a proposal. It will not necessarily be about harmonising company taxes. It could well be in other areas which affect vital Irish interests – such as agriculture or employment. So, thank you, Dr. Coughlan! We do need to be thinking and talking about this – but sensibly and with a more factually accurate starting point.

Maurice O'Connell, Tralee, Co Kerry

 

 

Transport 21 - 2015 is too long to wait for Navan railway line

It took less than three years originally to build the 26 mile Navan line by hand, with picks and shovels. Work commenced in October 1859 and was completed in August 1862.

Commute times from Navan to Dublin currently stand at over two hours for the same 26 mile trip by road, whilst a train would take approximately 49 minutes.

Asking Meath's commuters to wait for ten years to reopen the Navan railway when it was originally built in three years, is an appalling abandonment of those that must sit through the worst bottle-necks in the country, including that at Blanchardstown.

With modern track laying technology and using the old alignment, surely the line can be reopened much earlier than 2015?

Proinsias Mac Fhearghusa, Meath on Track PRO, Navan, Co Meath

 

 

Death of Liam Lawlor - Inaccurate Village reporting

I am writing in order to correct the inaccurate article in Village, edition 27 October - 2 November, on the death of Liam Lawlor.

Simply by reading the relevant edition of the Irish News of the World your reporter Vincent Browne would have seen that we carried no allegations about the female who was in the vehicle in which Liam Lawlor died. Rather than stereotyping newspapers, which is an easy thing to do, it would have been far more professional of Browne to have checked his facts before publishing his article.

Alex Marunchak, The Irish News of the World, Dublin 2

 

 

1916 - Was 1916 a crime?

Pierce Martin gives us a perfect example of the official cynicism that infuriated the Irish soldiers who fought in the First World War and made so many of them supporters of the War of the Independence when he refers to them as "Irish nationalists (who) fought the first world war under the rhetorical banner of the freedom of small nations." (Village, 3-9 November) Those men did not fight and die for rhetoric. They believed in the ideal of freedom for small nations and for their own nation in particular. Pierce Martin should not dare to attribute his own insulting cynicism to such brave and honest men.

Pierce may seek to console, and delude, himself that Tom Barry "was wholly atypical of the National Volunteers" who fought in the War. But look at some facts. For example, in Cork alone there were an estimated 12,000 ex-Irish soldiers from the War. They marched proudly as a body at the funeral of MacCurtain and in MacSwiney's select funeral cortege. Mrs MacCurtain thanked them publicly in the papers and they wrote to the King and Lloyd George in support of MacSwiney on hunger strike. They fought a two-day pitched battle in Patrick Street with Crown forces in July 1920 and three of their number were killed and at least 20 injured. In an indicative gesture the Crown forces used the blood of one of the victims to paint their regiment's name on a nearby wall. The Crown forces attacked them again in March 1921 and wrecked their office. They opened a new office in the city centre in September 1921 and invited the local Sinn Fein TD, J J Walsh, to do the honours (not located, by the way, in Cork's mythical 'Main Street' of Pierce's vivid imagination).

There was the extraordinary but perfectly understandable scene during the ambush of Royal Fusiliers on a train near Millstreet (Drishanebeag) of an Irish solider on the train joining the ambushing party! Even the renowned Mick O'Leary VC, the hero of the trenches from Macroom, decorated personally by the King, did his bit for the cause.

Were all these soldiers also atypical and in some way intimidated to act as they did? Of course not, and the IRA were not so silly as to target them in any particular way. On the contrary, they were seen as some of the IRA's best allies, actual and potential.

Pierce seems to think that I need Senia Pastea (sic) or Desmond FitzGerald to tell me that Ireland was integrating with the UK in the pre-World War I years. That was obvious. That was the default position for Ireland and if all had gone as expected we might all be happy "West Brits" today and Pierce the happiest man in Ireland. He believes that 1916 stopped all this. But, in the sequence of actual events that ruined the story 1916 was the effect and not the cause.

The successful revolt of Ulster against Home Rule started the unravelling with, inter alia, the setting up of the UVF in 1912 to fight against Home Rule, the copycat Irish Volunteers in 1913 to fight for Home Rule, the successful Curragh Mutiny that same year, the consequent betrayal of Home Rule by the Government, the launching of the World War by Britain with all its false promises, military rule under the Defence of the Realm Act (DORA) from August 1914, the Ulster Unionists being brought into the new unelected Government in 1915 - to name just the main events.

The 1916 Rising was a reaction to all this based on the proven, unarguable fact that physical force is what could change government policy on Ireland - proved conclusively to everyone and anyone by the success of the Ulster Unionists.

All this disappears from Pierce's narrative. We are left instead with assertions such as that Thomas Carlyle's notions in 1841 had something to do with causing 1916. Maybe I have not read as much about 1916, or Carlyle, as Pierce but I have yet to come across any clear evidence of Mr Carlyle creating "the real context" for the event as Pierce claims. And Pierce further asserts that "there was no historic context" for it. That means it was an event out of history – therefore some sort of supernatural event - and there was I thinking that we had all left superstitions behind us. The only logic of all this is that Thomas Carlyle is God and for some reason caused the 1916 Rising. Whatever next!

The plain fact is that is was the experience of World War I, and the betrayal suffered by those who fought in it and those who had supported them, that was the single most potent factor ensuring the success of the War of Independence and the retrospective acclamation of the 1916 Rebels.

Pierce's thesaurus of insults for all and sundry must be nearly depleted at this stage and maybe we can now hope for debate based on common sense.

Jack Lane, Millstreet, Co Cork

 

 

STATEMENT - Housing is a right, not a privilege

The second public meeting of the newly-formed Dun Laoghaire Housing Action Group will place in the Port View Hotel, Marine Road, Dun Laoghaire on 16 November at 8pm.

Speakers on the topic of housing and homelessness will include Fr Peter Mc Verry of the Arrupe Society, John Dunne of the Dun Laoghaire Housing Action Committee and Richard Boyd Barrett of the Socialist Workers Party.

All councillors in the Dun Laoghaire area will be invited to attend the meeting along with members of the public.

The housing situation in Dun Laoghaire continues to cause grave concern to the people of the borough, with over 3,800 people now on local authority housing lists. The recent case of Antoinette Taite, who was forced to spend 42 nights in a tent outside council offices, has also highlighted the lack of temporary emergency accommodation in the area. The issue of homelessness will also be high on the agenda, as, with winter rapidly approaching, the homeless of Dun Laoghaire find themselves forced to sleep out in inclement, dangerous weather.

Dun Laoghaire Housing Action Group shall continue to lobby on many issues including:

› The immediate implementation of the 20 per cent 'social and affordable housing' element in every development

› A housing policy based on inclusion of local communities rather than exclusion

› The faster supply of council homes by the compulsory purchase of land

› Fair rent for council and other tenants

› Good quality shelters for homeless people of all ages and needs

› Decent emergency accommodation within the borough

› An independent appeals procedures on housing issues.

Dun Laoghaire Housing Action Group. More: Information please contact: Jennifer May: jenlmay@eircom.net

 

 

Education - Gender not an issue

Seamus McKenna's assertion (Village 3-9 November) that "it is... a mistaken liberalism that men should be encouraged just as much as women to become teachers, particularly at primary level" is misinformed, illogical and extremely offensive. His notion that men are more sexually aggressive and therefore unsuitable to primary teaching is just the kind of blanket generalising and stereotyping that kept women out of the workforce for so long.

Is it absolutely desirable that children should receive a balanced education from male and female teachers, at primary and at secondary level.

It is also essential that our children are not taught in crumbling buildings, in overcrowded classes or in schools that have to fund-raise to provide for basic facilities. The Government has the second lowest percentage of GDP spend on education in Europe. We also have the second highest class sizes in Europe.

The current minister – a female – is also taking special needs teachers away from small disadvantaged schools throughout the North Inner City, which I represent, because of her new weighted system of special needs allocation.

McKenna would be better served studying these inequalities within the system – which have been administered by equally uncaring female and male Fianna Fáil ministers for education.

Councillor Aodhan O Riordain, Sheriff Street teacher and North Inner City Representative, Dublin 3

Tags: