A normal day 23rd January 2012
Off out around the park, I like going around on Sunday, it so quiet. Its damp, though not very cold, the lamp posts slide by, one by one, and I am home at last. The crocuses have poked a cautious nose up. It starting to get light again.
Though I am getting a little fed up with the Glums. Poor Jimmy Edwards, spent his acting career, as a lovable rogue, poor, work shy, drunkard. Then he decided to run for parliament in real life as a Conservative and lost. I can’t think why?
Dick Bentley was Edwards senior by 12 years, ended up playing his son. And of course it was the start of the glorious June Whitfield’s career.
Pud is a lot better, tail up and even a tail swish at the terrifying dangerous Kitten, that is brave indeed. She settles down to her warm air vent. Having spent almost £400 I look into Cat insurance. Petplan seems best, though those banks are frauds. I get them for about £15 each a month the banks offer insurance for £50! each!
Pheasant we watch You Must be Joking, again an 1965 military initiative test comedy film, strange how with all the talent of the British acting profession, and trying hard can they manage to produce something so dull. Or rather misdirected, curious.
Scrabble today I win and get over 400, all without thinking about it, poor Mary, but I am sure she will get a suitable revenge.
Fave Letters:
Three men convicted of distributing literature calling for gay people to be killed (Report, 21 January) claimed they were publicising an Islamic view of homosexuality; I presume the Qur’an is the source of their opinion. The Bible also says of homosexuals “they shall surely be put to death” (Leviticus 20:13). Will the distribution of Bibles and Qur’ans be affected by the ruling in this case?
David Marshall
Llanrwst, Conwy
The skyrocketing price of air
The oil companies are doing their best to keep up with the bankers. Visiting my local BP petrol station, I decided to check my tyre pressure. I was horrified to discover that the charge for this service had increased from 20p to 50p (150 per cent), and received scarce consolation from the till attendant who informed me that I would now receive far more air for my payment (sufficient presumably to inflate a zeppelin) and that all other companies had imposed a similar increase.
Tim Cattell
Croydon, Surrey
Listen to unions
So The Independent has decided that the unions are the enemy: “Labour must stand up to the unions” (leading article, 18 January). For working people, it is only the unions that care about their living standards, their pensions, their health and safety. The Labour Party was founded by the unions precisely to give them a voice. It’s about time someone did listen to them. We might then have a better world.
Steve Mills
London SW17
School cadets gain an early advantage
SIR – My four years in the Combined Cadet Force (CCF) was an invaluable experience (Letters, January 15): it prepared me for the misery of basic training when doing National Service in the Army.
On arrival at the Oswestry camp, I was already capable of rifle drill, pressing uniforms, making bed rolls, “bulling” boots, “blancoing” webbing and polishing brass – all to a reasonably high standard.
I stood out in my troop because none of the others had enjoyed the experience of being a school cadet. For this reason, my sergeant sent me off into the town on his bicycle to do his wife’s shopping. He explained: “I have chosen you ’cos you are the only one that knows how to salute officers properly.”
Chris Harding
Parkstone, Dorset
Marriage of true minds
SIR – My husband and I will be celebrating our 21st wedding anniversary this year (Old enough to know better, News Review, January 15).
There were a few raised eyebrows when I, then aged 45, a curate in the Church of England and a widow with three children, married a 25-year-old reformed drug addict. But we were soon accepted as a normal couple. We are very happy and neither of us regrets the marriage at all.
Rev Liz Thomas
Retford, Nottinghamshire
Obituary:
Mary Raftery was one of the crusading greats of Irish journalism exposing the horrifying treatment over decades of children in the care of the Catholic Church.
Her TV documentaries shocked the Irish people, revealing a scarcely believable system in which children were routinely subjected to sexual, physical and psychological abuse.
They also indicated that many senior churchmen, though aware of the torments of the young, had systematically covered up the crimes of sadistic and paedophile priests and other clerics. Although the Church contested her allegations, which first aired in 1999, a series of official inquiries completely confirmed her findings. Last year, in response to the most recent report, Cardinal Sean Brady admitted it was “another dark day in the history of the response of church leaders to the cry of children abused by church personnel.”
This was a vindication of Raftery’s work. She was no ordinary journalist, but rather a figure who brought about a sea-change in attitudes, shattering the age-old tradition of deference to the Catholic Church. As such, she was probably the most influential campaigning Irish journalist of the last half-century. Her death, at the age of 54, was followed by tributes from many quarters.
One victim Andrew Madden, author of Altar Boy: A story of life after abuse, said: “Without Mary’s determination so much of what we know about our collective past would still remain hidden.” Another victim, Colm O’Gorman, who now heads Amnesty International in Ireland, said: “Where others might have been intimidated by the barriers of a system and a society determined to keep the truth hidden, Mary seemed to know no fear.”
The daughter of a diplomat, she was born in Dublin, where she attended university. But, tiring of engineering, she turned instead to journalism and activism, becoming noted for her determination and self-confidence. She recalled: “I spent my time writing and agitating and didn’t complete the course.” After working on various publications she joined RTE, producing programmes on topics such as health, the arts and the media.
Her documentary series States of Fear was broadcast in 1999. There had been earlier revelations of ill-treatment and abuse in church-run industrial schools, which were essentially orphanages, but her programmes had an immediate and profound impact. This was partly because of the huge research which had gone into them – she spoke in detail to well over a hundred victims – and because she established that abuse was so widespread. But most of all her programmes carried such force because survivors agreed to be interviewed on camera describing their experiences in harrowing and convincing detail.
She won the confidence of interviewees by departing from the broadcasting norm and allowing them to approve their testimonies. She thus provided a rare combination of meticulous research and personal empathy.
Three years later she produced a follow-up, Cardinal Secrets. Although the instinct of some in government was to delve no deeper, the effect was to provide a tidal wave of public anger. The authorities issued a formal apology and set up a commission to inquire into the abuse. This led on to a series of reports, each of which led to fresh shockwaves as more and more appalling details were unearthed. They exposed how priests and others misbehaved, how they were protected by their superiors, and how the civil authorities had been largely indifferent to the welfare of chidlren.
The fact that bishops and cardinals had covered up rather than caring for vulnerable young people, caused major damage to the church. The scale can be seen by the fact that around 14,000 people have received compensation.
Raftery’s programmes brought her under fierce attack and she was accused of being anti-Catholic. “It was like being in the middle of a maelstrom,” she recalled. “There was a sustained assault from a small cohort of conservative Catholics. They stated that my entire determination was to attack the Catholic Church in every possible way, shape or form. It just wasn’t true.”
Following Raftery’s death the Minister for Children, Frances Fitzgerald described her work as “bringing home the squalid prevalence of child sexual abuse while emphasising the life-long damage it could inflict on those abused.”
Over the years she turned to other subjects, last September broadcasting her last documentary, which dealt with the conditions in psychiatric hospitals. But she remained closely involved in the abuse issue, writing a play on the topic and co-authoring a book on the industrial schools. She also highlighted the cause of girls and women who had suffered in the involuntary servitude of the Magdalene Laundries.
She contributed regular articles which chronicled how the religious and political authorities were reacting to the continuing stream of revelations. The articles projected indignation but also dissected, in courteous but clinically remorseless detail, the changing and sometimes evasive reactions of the Irish hierarchy. As a result she built up great personal authority at the same time as the authority of the Catholic church steadily withered.
In death she had the distinction of being commended both by victims and by the institution responsible for the injustice. Diarmuid Martin, Archbishop of Dublin, said of her: “Bringing the truth out is always a positive thing even though it may be a painful truth. I believe that, through her exposition of sins of the past and of the moment, the church is a better place for children.”
Women who had been confined in the laundries recalled that she had once said: “The most important thing you can do is to give a voice to people who have been silenced. And what else would I be doing?” Her words, they said, “will resonate with us.”
Mary Raftery, investigative journalist and campaigner: born Dublin 21 December 1957; married David Waddell (one son); died 10 January 2012.
Full Text:
Guardian:
David Cameron believes he is on a crusade to drive a new “moral capitalism” (Report, 19 January). He should read Will Hutton on stakeholder capitalism and look to Germany, where employee representatives engage in corporate decision-making including levels of executive pay, local banks provide long-term support to business, apprenticeships remain common, stakeholders include suppliers and distributors, and community engagement stems from a responsibility to protect the interests of all employees.
The ghastly alternative of shareholder capitalism engineered by Conservative governments in the 1980s, and cravenly supported by New Labour, has destroyed UK manufacturing and turned the country into a spivs’ paradise, with investment banks and hedge-fund managers holding everyone, including the government, to ransom. Where is the moral compass in gambling on corporate failure? Or in ensuring that one of the few profitable UK manufacturing sectors left is an arms industry mostly in partnership with the US, a war-exporting economy?
Shareholder capitalism regards share value as the only criterion for success, encouraging foreign takeover of businesses like Cadbury’s that for 176 years had applied Quaker principles. Asset-stripping has become a national sport, devastating families and communities. It is inconceivable that Cameron will reverse this ruinous crusade on behalf of the super-rich parasites who have devastated the UK economy.
The tragedy is that the stakeholder model remains under attack throughout the western world. Without a multilateral turnaround by all OECD countries, beginning with the closure of tax havens and the imposition of a financial transaction tax, and the establishment of a World Environment Organisation possessing common powers and veto alongside the World Trade Organisation, we are heading towards an economic, environmental and social meltdown.
Simon Sweeney
University of York
• While Tweedledum and Tweedledee argue over the nature of “popular capitalism” (Socialism belongs here, 21 January), mainstream solutions on both left and right will only deepen our social and economic crisis in the long run. The suggestion that China might be the model to follow to cure our economic woes shows how out of touch with reality we have become (China’s success challenges a failed economic consensus, 18 January). While backing the idea that public ownership should be at the heart of a solution, we must also recognise that China-style 9% annual growth in GDP across all countries would spell long-term disaster for the planet and its inhabitants. The thinktank Green House has embarked on a year-long project to describe the economic and social characteristics of a world in which indiscriminate growth is not a precondition for prosperity. We need a new alternative, not simply a false choice between austerity and increased GDP.
Professor Andrew Dobson
Green House thinktank
• The UK government is “delighted” that the Chinese government has bought a substantial holding in the company that controls the privatised utility Thames Water (Report, 21 January). Deutsche Bahn, still the monopoly and state-owned German railway company, now owns a major privatised British transport interest (Arriva). A major element of our power generation industry has been bought by EDF, in which the French state has a controlling interest. Even Barclays, determined to be independent of the UK government’s efforts to bail out the banking sector, now has the state-owned Qatar Investment Authority as its largest shareholder. But our own government, having become the principal shareholder in some of our banks, is so keen to get rid of them that it is prepared to sell Northern Rock to Virgin at a major loss to the taxpayer. So it looks like it’s OK for foreign governments to control important UK assets, but not OK for the UK government to do so. Or am I missing something?
Dr Bernard Naylor
Southampton
• As we step gingerly into the new year, one cannot help but be struck by the degree of political and economic hopelessness which pervades Europe, as governments strain to outdo each other in feats of austerity for fear of the market’s terrible retribution. Meanwhile, unemployment continues to rise and faith in politics and capitalism itself erodes.
The Bank of England should redirect some of its QE toward “shovel-ready” infrastructure projects: social housing, fibre-optic broadband, motorway widening, acceleration of Crossrail etc. Where possible, let the private sector evaluate the economic viability of each project and carry out the work. This funding may also be more effective than conventional QE in creating the demand growth we wish to see and support our economy until the banks and the government itself have stabilised their balance sheets.
The Bank cannot, by statute, be exposed to private sector losses, but this could be overcome by issuing infrastructure bonds via a government entity with guarantee attached to safeguard the Bank against such an occurrence. It is hard to see how such money-printing would be inflationary given the spare capacity in our economy currently. In time, the Bank could reduce its support and balance sheet by selling the bonds, helping to create a retail bond market.
Something similar could be done in the eurozone with the ECB funding the EU’s structural and cohesion funds.
Keynes may be dead, but surely we can adopt his teachings for the modern era rather than submit to this austerity-fuelled melancholy.
Michael Bourke
FPP Asset Management
• The call from the IMF, the World Bank and other international agencies for a move away from job-killing austerity towards green policies and infrastructure spending (IMF warns of risk posed by global austerity plans, 20 January) must shape the growing debate around the slippery concept of responsible capitalism. Since 2008 the Green New Deal Group has been documenting just such an action plan. So here is one we made earlier.
Step one, the government must put its only significant job generator, the “Green Deal”, on economic steroids. £275bn has been e-printed and frittered into the coffers of banks via quantitative easing. The expected next round QE 3 should instead allocate £20bn to kick start a huge energy saving programme involving up to 14 million homes. This would start to tackle the coalition’s biggest deficit – adequate demand in the economy. Step two, use some of this money to act as a guarantor to attract further private funding, particularly pension funds. This could be used to train and employ a carbon army to crawl over every building in the UK to make them energy-efficient. Younger people would be the main beneficiaries, particularly in urban areas where the vast majority live. Leveraging billions from pension funds to employ the young would be a welcome act of intergenerational solidarity.
If the government doesn’t listen to the IMF and immediately adopt such a programme, this would give the two Eds something large-scale and concrete to propose, ie a “Green Prosperity not Blue Austerity” approach that puts clear green-blue water between Labour and the coalition.
Colin Hines
Convenor, Green New Deal Group
• Tristram Hunt is quite right to argue that is a long tradition in Britain of opposition to the excesses of the unfettered free market, and that the choice is most certainly not between Brent Cross and Soviet-style central planning. What he fails to emphasise sufficiently, though, is that there are many versions of the modern “market economy” ranging from the Nordic social-democratic model to Chinese state-led development. Cameron’s “popular capitalism”, like Thatcherism before it, points towards the deregulated capitalism associated with the United States. But it is precisely this finance-dominated Anglo-Saxon model which in recent years has been found wanting. One needs only turn to egalitarian Denmark or Sweden to see that the market, however poor a master, can be a good servant.
Professor George Irvin
Soas, University of London
• Larry Elliott believes that the rating agencies’ failures in assessing sub-prime investments don’t detract from the accuracy of their downgrades of sovereign debt (Cuts on the menu as five-star guests arrive, 16 January). Maybe, but how do the agencies calculate, if at all, the precise impact of their predictions on investors’ behaviour and the subsequent economic credibility of the downgraded nations? If they don’t or can’t include such impacts in their predictions, then surely we are into similar epistemological territory to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle – crudely, that by attempting to measure the phenomena they are affecting the very outcomes being investigated; here, making the economic situation worse. If they can predict their impacts, I’d like to get some money on their forecasts for the next meeting at Bath racecourse.
Bryn Jones
Bath
Dr Ann Robinson takes GPs in Hertfordshire to task for asking patients who are obese to lose weight before having non-urgent surgery, and for asking smokers to see a stop-smoking adviser (The rationing is everywhere, 20 January). We need to correct Dr Robinson – no patient in Hertfordshire is refused surgery on the grounds of their weight or because they smoke, if their clinical condition tells us they need it.
Evidence shows that people who are very overweight are at much greater risk of developing serious complications and recover more slowly from surgery. We are making sure patients are in the best possible health before they have an operation.
We know that poverty is a significant factor in obesity, and the poor suffer most from the debilitating conditions that go with it. It is a fundamental part of our duty as doctors to take robust action to support people to develop healthy eating habits that we all know benefit long-term health.
The policy has been working in practice in our area, specifically for hip and knee surgery, for nine months. Early analysis shows that about 75% of people who have been asked to lose weight have reached their target. For some, the weight loss improved symptoms so much that they chose not to have their joints replaced. Attendance at stop-smoking sessions has doubled. No one who has needed surgery has been refused.
We are not making moral judgments, nor is this about rationing. It is about GPs doing more to improve public and individual health.
Dr Tony Kostick Chair, East and North Hertfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group, Dr Nicolas Small Chair, Herts Valleys Clinical Commissioning Group
With regard to Boris Island (Shortcuts, G2, 19 January), there’s already an airport on the Thames estuary capable of dealing with large jets, with road and rail links that could be upgraded at far less expense than a new airport: Manston on the Isle of Thanet, which is used by 747 freight jets.
John Fullman
Thornton Heath, Surrey
• I have found out that Passport to Pimlico is showing at 1.30pm on Channel 4 on 23 January and the Third Man is also on Channel 4 at 1.10pm on 26 January. Guardian readers deprived of their daytime TV listings will not know this. I would be grateful if you could pass it on.
Peter Russell
Tunbridge Wells, Kent
• J Edgar Hoover, Margaret Thatcher, Wallis Simpson … Any chance of a film character worthy of our sympathy (G2, 20 January)?
Michael Bor
London
• ”Man arrested over importation of Saddam Hussein statue’s buttock” (19 January). Bit of a half-arsed attempt?
Terri Green
Langley, Warwickshire
Independent:
Over the past couple of weeks a number of letters have conflated IT expertise with programming. The biggest shortfall is the understanding of the “I” in IT – information. Programming is a 20th-century solution, with a focus on using as little data as possible to avoid overwhelming machines of limited capability. Today’s problems are about how to enable organisations to work together or sustain businesses, which require the understanding of how information is used rather than technology of manipulating bytes.
For example, aircraft, ships and most buildings have a design life of 40 to 70 years, but for the design software used, the software developers have a business model that sees them rewrite their offering every 10 years. If it were not bad enough that transferring design data from one version of software to another is dangerously error-prone, many software vendors lock the data away in proprietary formats so that the data owners cannot use the data without paying the vendors to develop translators. It is as if a car maker sold you a car but kept ownership of the keys, so that you couldn’t sell it on without paying the maker to transfer the key.
We need people who understand information and its value, and this requires more that technical literacy in programming; it requires information literacy and this is sadly lacking in most engineering and computing graduates.
Sean Barker
Bristol
David Woods (19 January) thinks that it is more important to teach the use of Microsoft’s programs than the principles of computer programming. This must be one of the few fields in which the products of a quasi-monopolist can even begin to be considered a proper subject of general education.
One of the reasons that programming is an important discipline is that it leads students naturally into the subjects of software interoperability and open standards. On these depend the internet and the worldwide web, which arguably have made a far greater contribution to the recent information revolution than any single software company.
Microsoft, by contrast, has been slow to seek interoperability. By all means introduce Word and Excel in schools, but as examples of the classes “wordprocessor” and “spreadsheet”; we don’t teach people to drive Fords or Volkswagens, but cars; and we do teach them something about what goes on under the bonnet, and why.
John Palmer
Weymouth, Dorset
End the subsidies for Scotland
Hamish McRae (14 January) writes: “While Scotland is poorer than London and the South East, it is richer than the whole of the north of England and much richer than Wales.” So taxpayers, including those in Wales and the north of England, are subsidising the higher education of not just Scottish students but of all those in the EU who are accepted to study in Scottish universities, while we ourselves are denied this unless we pay £9,000pa in fees (and Scottish degrees take four years).
We are entitled to ask why we have to subsidise the whole of the EU – let alone the Scots? Does the Government understand why the majority of the English want Scotland to leave the union as soon as possible? The Scottish Parliament is throwing away our tax revenues, money that has been worked hard for in Wales and in the north as well as in the wealthier south-east of England. It must be held to account.
Jane O’Nions
Sevenoaks, Kent
Jonathan Wallace inquires (Letters, 18 January) whether the current arrangements concerning English students attending Scottish universities would prevail post-independence. If Scotland remained within the EU, English students would be on a par with other European countries.
However, if we are to believe the scaremongering by the Unionist parties and Scotland is required to reapply for EU membership, the country might decide to have a relationship with the EU similar to that of Norway. The effect of this might be that the Scottish government would fund Scottish students only and to a greater extent.
The Scottish people and government value students who gain a university education. The task for Jonathan is to persuade his government to do the same.
James W McCurry
Wigan
Governmental independence for Scotland does not necessarily mean a rejection of a joint monarchy. The Royal Arms and their supporters are the personal badge of the monarch and, as long as the Queen also remains Queen of Scotland, there is no need to redesign them, irrespective of the realities of government (Letters, 18 January).
The previous inclusion of the Red Dragon as one of the supporters of the Tudor Royal Arms was in recognition of Henry VII’s Welsh ancestry and birth, not a result of the so-called Acts of Union between England and Wales (Laws of Wales Acts) passed some 50 years later during the reign of Henry VIII.
I agree that Wales is long overdue representation on the British flag, but Y Ddraig Goch does not fit easily into a redesign of the Union flag. If Scotland gains independence, I would suggest that St David’s flag replaces that of St Andrew in the composite design, so that the blue background becomes black and the white outline of St George’s cross becomes yellow.
NIGEL PARRY
Edenbridge, Kent
Derek Easey (Letters, 20 January) trots out all the stock arguments re oil, Barnett etc. If the boot was on the other foot it might be that the Scots would say the same about England – however in reality both would be wrong. Ordinary folk like Derek and me will never know the true facts.
But what is without doubt is that Scotland is changing. That is why the referendum vote should only relate to people living in Scotland. Ordinary folk in Worthing, going about their daily working lives, will not be affected one iota by Scotland becoming a sovereign state again – and more important, I doubt it would affect my daily life either.
Brian Connor
Edinburgh
Shameful attack on doctors’ pensions
It should not be surprising that doctors are so concerned about the attack on the NHS pension scheme. Many would face working in extremely physically and mentally demanding roles until they are almost 70. (“Doctors threaten first strike in 40 years – over £48,000 pensions”, 19 January).
The NHS pension scheme was completely overhauled just four years ago to make it sustainable for the future. It is currently delivering £2bn a year to the Treasury. The new changes – which would leave some doctors paying twice as much into the scheme – come on top of cuts to NHS services, unnecessary top-down reforms and what will soon be four years of pay freezes. For many doctors, the attack on their pensions is the final straw.
It has been 37 years since doctors last took industrial action. The Government must take this indication of the strength of feeling seriously and respond constructively.
Dr Hamish Meldrum
Chairman of Council
British Medical Association
London WC1
Marriage isn’t for everyone
Your leading article in support of same-sex marriage (18 January) unfortunately promotes the misconception that this will provide equal treatment for heterosexual and gay couples. Regrettably this is not so. Civil partnerships will still be denied to heterosexual couples who want to register their commitment to each other but who do not want to marry.
The question always posed is why, for some of us, civil marriage differs from civil partnership when most people nowadays approach marriage on the basis of partnership. The answer lies in the differing nature of the basic contract. The marriage contract is a union, the primary definition of which is “to join together or become one”. A partner “shares or takes part with another”, but is not “one” with another.
The concept of a union in which there is a merging of identity, both in law and socially, is one that some heterosexual people simply don’t want. So we live together, unmarried but committed, without any recognition in law, though usually recognised socially.
There are significant disadvantages which marriage would remove, and indeed many people marry late in life after decades of commitment for that reason only. For instance, we have no automatic rights of inheritance to our jointly owned home; we can’t be recognised as next of kin unless we make a formal declaration to that effect, and we’re liable to pay inheritance tax on the estate of a deceased partner when there is a will in our favour.
If it is accepted that marriage implies for some gay people a subtle but important difference from civil partnership, equal treatment must deliver the same options to both gay and heterosexual couples.
Paula Jones
London SW20
The skyrocketing price of air
The oil companies are doing their best to keep up with the bankers. Visiting my local BP petrol station, I decided to check my tyre pressure. I was horrified to discover that the charge for this service had increased from 20p to 50p (150 per cent), and received scarce consolation from the till attendant who informed me that I would now receive far more air for my payment (sufficient presumably to inflate a zeppelin) and that all other companies had imposed a similar increase.
Tim Cattell
Croydon, Surrey
Roman bikinis
Tell Gyles Cooper (Letters, 20 January) that a leather bikini worn by a female athlete was found in the mud of the Thames not too long ago; it can be seen in the Roman gallery of the Museum of London. So no, it isn’t a new thing and it probably felt and looked good on a beautiful young woman. Let the women boxers wear what they like.
Helen Braithwaite
London NW3
Listen to unions
So The Independent has decided that the unions are the enemy: “Labour must stand up to the unions” (leading article, 18 January). For working people, it is only the unions that care about their living standards, their pensions, their health and safety. The Labour Party was founded by the unions precisely to give them a voice. It’s about time someone did listen to them. We might then have a better world.
Steve Mills
London SW17
Yacht quarrels
If the Queen wants a wretched yacht, why can’t she buy it herself? She has, after all, a massive personal fortune, much of it historically swiped from the people of this country and other countries around the world, and British taxpayers keep her and her family in luxury.
And if Lord Ashcroft has £5m to spare, why can’t he donate it to something worthwhile, like an environmental charity, or one trying to combat poverty?
Penny Little
Great Haseley, Oxfordshire
Cinema sound
Are all cinema-goers deaf, that they need to be bombarded with 300 decibels? Or is the deafness the result of such bombardment? If so can we sue?
Ramji R Abinashi
Amersham, Buckinghamshire
Telegraph:
SIR – If we cut up more English countryside, we will soon have nothing left in the lowlands except fragments of woods and fields between railways, motorways, flyovers, fly-unders, link roads, spur roads, trading estates and housing estates.
This will fulfil the Marxist prophecy that town and country will merge. At most, all that will be left will be garden cities like Welwyn and Letchworth.
Matthew d’Ancona, in his thoughtful article (Comment, January 15), comes down in favour of High Speed 2 and defends David Cameron as a countryman and “the most devotedly rural occupant of No 10 since Sir Alec Douglas-Home”. But a true countryman puts preservation first, and fits in the need for infrastructure and the built environment around that belief. Spiritual death follows the destruction of broad acres.
If there is a need for improved rail links and high-speed trains, why not run them alongside existing motorways? The Government should consult the Institution of Civil Engineers, which exists to provide ingenious solutions, and should ask them to plan, design and supervise upgrades and routes.
James Lewis
Harrow on the Hill, Middlesex
SIR – Peter Kirby (Letters, January 15) says that “HS2 is part of a European high-speed railway initiative.” So how much – of our own money – is the EU going to give us back towards its astronomical cost?
Following the closure of so many of our post offices, as a direct result of an EU initiative to liberalise postal services across Europe and tackle postal monopolies, the further involvement of this shambolic and bankrupt outfit in our transport system is the best possible reason for having nothing to do with it.
Richard Shaw
Dunstable, Bedfordshire
SIR – Alex Salmond and his party have said that the future of Scotland will be decided by the “will of the Scottish people”, but they have not clarified how the “Scottish people” will be defined for the purpose of a referendum.
I was born and brought up in Edinburgh, of two Scottish parents and four Scottish grandparents. My family name represents one of the oldest established clans in Scotland.
My father was an officer with the Royal Scots and both grandfathers fought in the First World War with the Royal Scots and the Highland Light Infantry respectively.
I was educated at an Edinburgh school and the University of Aberdeen, where I gained an honours degree in Scottish history. I have performed with traditional Scottish music bands since I was 15 and am a proud member of the Caledonian Club in London.
I hold exactly the same passport as Alex Salmond. But like so many Scots, my career has taken me overseas. At present, I work for an Italian company and live in England.
Related Articles
Spiritual death at the sword of high-speed rail
22 Jan 2012
All this notwithstanding, I fear Alex Salmond will deny me a vote in my country’s most important decision since 1707 because, as I understand it, the conditions of suffrage boil down to having a Scottish postcode at the time of the referendum.
Millions of Scots living outside Scotland are anxiously awaiting clarification on this point, and confirmation of our right to vote on the destiny of our country.
Peter Ferguson
Hertford
SIR – The feisty Scots have undoubtedly advanced Britain and the world with stunning innovation. But before they are seduced by the beguiling words of Alex Salmond, they should consider the failure of another Scottish leader, Sir William Patterson, a co-founder of the Bank of England in 1694, who almost bankrupted the Scottish economy with his Panama get-rich-quick scheme.
Another Scottish knight, Sir Fred Goodwin, has also created financial havoc, and it was on Gordon Brown’s watch that the gap between rich and poor was allowed to widen, and the economy brought down.
Alex Salmond is flying in the face of history, as the human race now tries to pull together for universal benefit.
Bill Newham
Worsley, Lancashire
SIR – Matt Showering says that Scotland does not have the constitutional power to secede from the United Kingdom, even if it has the political might to do so (Letters, January 15). But the expression “people”, as defined tentatively by the United Nations Organisation, denotes a social entity with a clear identity, its own characteristics and a long history, and implies a relationship with a territory.
This is the definition for the purpose of establishing whether a social entity is a “people” fit to enjoy and exercise the right of self-determination.
On this basis, Scotland’s claim to self-determination would be unchallengeable. It does not need to ask a British prime minister’s permission to secede.
Dick Gagel
Peterculter, Aberdeenshire
SIR – On the union of the English and Scottish crowns in 1603, the red dragon of Wales was removed from the royal coat of arms and replaced by the Scottish unicorn. If Scotland becomes independent, will the original dragon emblem replace the unicorn?
Furthermore, the Union flag could become green where, now, it is blue, allowing Wales to be represented on the flag for the first time since the Wales-England union in 1536.
That being said, it is to be hoped that a majority of the good people of Scotland would vote to remain within the Union.
Derek Jones
Ingatestone, Essex
SIR – Perhaps England should make a unilateral declaration of independence and secede from the United Kingdom, leaving the Celtic fringes either to get on with their own lives or to negotiate terms to join.
If they joined, they would become part of England in one united country with a single parliament to represent everybody – which is what we had before devolution.
Ted Shorter
Hildenborough, Kent
School cadets gain an early advantage
SIR – My four years in the Combined Cadet Force (CCF) was an invaluable experience (Letters, January 15): it prepared me for the misery of basic training when doing National Service in the Army.
On arrival at the Oswestry camp, I was already capable of rifle drill, pressing uniforms, making bed rolls, “bulling” boots, “blancoing” webbing and polishing brass – all to a reasonably high standard.
I stood out in my troop because none of the others had enjoyed the experience of being a school cadet. For this reason, my sergeant sent me off into the town on his bicycle to do his wife’s shopping. He explained: “I have chosen you ’cos you are the only one that knows how to salute officers properly.”
Chris Harding
Parkstone, Dorset
SIR – Recent letters have mentioned the Combined Cadet Force, but no mention has been made of the Army Cadet Force, the Air Training Corps or the Sea Cadet Corps. These local youth organisations exist throughout the country and provide the same opportunities as the CCF for young people.
Parents, as well as encouraging their children to join, can also volunteer to become helpers. Commitment is for at least one evening a week and the occasional weekend.
The cadet forces are not recruiting agents for the Armed Forces, so Services experience is not necessary.
Alex Clarke
Cardiff
Marriage of true minds
SIR – My husband and I will be celebrating our 21st wedding anniversary this year (Old enough to know better, News Review, January 15).
There were a few raised eyebrows when I, then aged 45, a curate in the Church of England and a widow with three children, married a 25-year-old reformed drug addict. But we were soon accepted as a normal couple. We are very happy and neither of us regrets the marriage at all.
Rev Liz Thomas
Retford, Nottinghamshire
Blair down under
SIR – Your graphic of Tony Blair’s travels over a period of 12 months (report, January 15) stopped short of his July 2011 visit to Australia.
Would that he had done the same.
Chris Watson
Carlton River, Tasmania, Australia
The old royal yacht was a businessman’s dream
SIR – The Royal Yacht Britannia (Letters, January 15) was the finest export tool any country could possess. It could sail into any port in the world and 50 local chief executives would be invited aboard to dine with Her Majesty. Those chief executives would then proceed to place export orders with 50 British chief executives on board. Her Majesty could then sail off to another port the next day.
I am sure a suitable ship could be purchased from a tycoon – Roman Abramovich has four, I believe – and converted into a new royal yacht. Surely the British people would welcome such a move, especially in the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee year.
Peter Kettell
Worrall, South Yorkshire
SIR – A new multi-purpose royal yacht is a great idea. But where would it be built: Germany, Italy or maybe China?
This project will only inspire the nation if the yacht is built in Britain. Do we still have the capacity?
Phil Blower
Southend-on-Sea, Essex
Tilting at Iran
SIR – It’s bad enough that William Hague, our Foreign Secretary, threatens Iran by echoing Washington’s warmongering phrase “no options off the table” (“Hague: Iran may cause arms race”, report, January 15). Worse still, he fails to criticise the recent assassination of another Iranian nuclear scientist. It is not in our national interest to condone state-sponsored terrorism.
It’s time Mr Hague acknowledged that the West’s acquiescence in Israel’s nuclear monopoly in the Middle East has its dangers. Henry Kissinger warned in 1969 that Israel was more likely than almost any other country to use its nuclear weapons because it was one of the few nations whose survival was genuinely threatened.
Yugo Kovach
Winterborne Houghton, Dorset
Leading bishops
SIR – Dr Peter Greenhalgh (Letters, January 8) blames politicians for the bishops we get, but it is the Church which, through the Crown Nominations Commission, chooses the names. The problem lies in the selection process and the criteria employed. As one senior bishop explained recently: “By and large, you rise to the top in the Church of England by not upsetting anyone.” He explained that by character, training and experience, such people are not usually comfortable with crises and confrontation.
The irony here is that it was almost certainly because the Rev Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, the former bishop of Rochester, refused to shy away from controversy and from theological, social and political truths unpalatable to the liberal oligarchy in Church and state that he rose no further.
At no point in their selection or ministry are clergy assessed or tested for leadership qualities or experience, Those subjects tend to be treated with a degree of indifference or embarrassment in the mistaken belief that academic prowess, membership of committees and synods, a lack of orthodoxy and an idealistic social conscience are substitutes.
There are exceptions: at least one diocese has introduced leadership seminars for clergy. But the Church has become so calcified in its prejudices and party politics that its best hope lies in a radical overhaul.
Not that this will happen, of course, because too many stand to lose, while the inbuilt closed-shop safeguards against such a reformation are too strong.
Rev R. C. Paget
Brenchley, Kent
Walrusonomics
SIR – Your take on Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, is sapient (Leading article, January 15). We should all note his abilities, but as a Leftist he believes that the capitalist goose that lays the golden eggs will never be strangled, and must have as much as possible taken from it to maximise state expenditure.
We have a sort of walrus-and-carpenter politics. Politicians fret about what to do with capital. One party sweeps it into heaps, the other spreads it out again.
But all progress in civilisation comes from the accumulation of economic power. It is only necessary to have a political echelon to curb the excesses of the economic operators, not to hamstring them. Instead, we get Ed Balls. Economic insanity is what we enjoyed under Labour. Pity we get political insanity under the Tories – think EU.
Lord Walsingham
Merton, Norfolk
Irish Times:
Recession causing mental anguish
Sir, – It is now observable in our communities that a lot of mental anguish is being caused by the recession.
People who before the recession were functioning well and flourishing on all levels now are seeking help for stress-related mental health problems such as depression and anxiety disorders.
For example, those who were self-employed before the downturn and paid their taxes, now with collapsed businesses find themselves without even the net of social welfare benefits. Many people find the stress of not being able to pay household bills promptly very difficult, particularly if they have been very conscientious in the past.
Another very difficult scenario is that of having insufficient income (due to job loss) to pay huge mortgages for houses now worth far less than the mortgage cost. This is a millstone of incredible weight and unendurable length for those who have endless years of hardship stretching ahead of them.
There is no sense that the Government is responding to the suffering being experienced by citizens right across the socio-economic groupings. For example, the management of banking arrears difficulties on a case-by- case basis allows an impersonal system to put the squeeze ruthlessly on people who may not be good at advocating for themselves, to the detriment of a sustainable income for themselves and their families and their ultimate mental health.
Enda Kenny showed great courage in facing up to the Catholic hierarchy soon after his election. He now needs to show similar courage in dealing with the ongoing crisis, not just in fiscal terms but on a human level, to keep our citizens from having to face too much suffering. – Yours, etc,
CYNTHIA CARROLL,
Occupational Therapist,
Portryan,
Newport, Co Tipperary.
Charges for fire emergency call-outs
Sir, – I was greatly interested in Anthony G Keane’s letter (January 13th) with regard to the new fire emergency charges in Dublin. Mr Keane’s letter covered, among other aspects, the charge of €500 for “false alarms” which “almost always are untraceable”.
As I write this, I have beside me an invoice from Meath County Council Fire Service Department for €350 (our Council is way ahead of its Dublin counterparts).
The background to this invoice is as follows. While we were on holidays last October our smoke alarm malfunctioned. This activated our alarm system and the alarm company monitor immediately made three phone calls: 1. to The Fire Service – 999; 2. to our kindly key-holding neighbour; 3. to myself. When I phoned our neighbour he confirmed that he had already reached our house and that all seemed well. With that the fire brigade arrived, the firemen were admitted to the house and having satisfied themselves that all was indeed well, they left again.
Within an hour, our smoke alarm malfunctioned again. Happily, when I got my call the second time, I succeeded in convincing the monitor (a different person this time) that it was a malfunction and he reluctantly agreed to cancel the second 999 call to the Fire Service. Otherwise, my above invoice would be for €700. There the matter “rested” until we got home.
When we returned from holidays, the alarm company sent engineers to examine our alarm system. They could find nothing to account for the malfunction of the smoke alarm. As of now no one has a clue as to why it all happened.
Last month the invoice for €350 arrived. I have contacted my home insurers only to be told that their cover is only for an actual fire; it does nor cover a “false alarm”.
It seems to me that what happened to us could happen to any householder with an alarm system installed. This type of “false alarm” is very definitely traceable It will attract the new substantial charge. And Dublin homeowners should take no consolation whatever from the assertion by a Dublin City Council representative that the charge “is covered by household insurance”. – Yours, etc,
VINCENT Mac CARTHY,
Cloncat,
Athboy PO,
Co Meath.
If you don’t have a TV . . .
Sir, – Just to let the Minister for Finance know (whether he believes me or not), that I do not have a TV nor do I watch TV or anything like it on my computer or any other device.
It looks like I’ll be making lots of trips to the post office this year to pay bin charges and TV charges. I might as well get the car tax too, even though I don’t have a car. I do see dogs occasionally, so probably I will need a dog licence as well before long.
Is this indirect taxation gone mad? – Yours, etc,
JENNIFER O’CONNELL,
Carleton Road,
Marino,
Dublin 3.
Sir, – Pat Rabbitte says that people are accessing public service content through, “other than traditional means” and that there must be a charge for this.
Insofar as this comment can only refer to RTÉ, then a quick perusal of the RTÉ Player page raises an interesting question as to what, in his mind, constitutes “public service content”. Surely he is not suggesting that EastEnders, Cougar Town, The Big Bang Theory, Casualty, Holby City, The Bill (and many, many more) now fall within the definition of “public service content”. In fact, the vast majority of the content available online from RTÉ does not originate in Ireland or from RTÉ and what is more, one of RTÉ’s most successful home programmes, Fair City, is not available “other than by traditional means”.
Analysis of television sales volume in Ireland would more than prove that it is still the means by which the vast majority of us access television services and thus, the licence fee method, if collected, is sufficient and no change is required.
Those who evade the licence fee now will evade any new charge for television access and so, the only purpose of his plan is to charge the rest of us so that we can fund those who do not pay.
This is nonsense dressed up as progressive initiative. I think the answer on this one has to be, “No deal”. – Yours, etc,
T GERARD BENNETT,
Bunbrosna,
Co Westmeath.
A day for the ‘lost generation’
Sir, – Regarding your emotive Generation Emigration series (Life & Culture), is it not time for us to erect a marker stone to these and all our lost generations?
May I suggest that we officially rename one of our many bank holidays – perhaps that in June or in August – as Emigrants’ Day? Such a small gesture, it would require so little in cost terms – ideally supported by communications companies – and stand as a call to all our family abroad that they are always in our minds.
Theirs is a sacrifice too great to be forgotten. – Yours, etc,
CONOR WOGAN,
Bow Bridge, Kilmainham,
Dublin 8.
How to save public money
Sir, – I am in full agreement with the comment under the Disability heading in your article “Public proposes 1,000 ways to save money” (Home News, January 19th).
Last week I attempted to return the brand new, never-used commode provided to my late mother-in-law towards the end of 2011. This item will be scrapped as it cannot be taken back in and sent to another person requiring one.
I can understand part of the argument, but why not take the equipment back and just put in a new toilet-pan section? What a waste of resources when the State needs to save every euro it can.
PHILIP SUTER,
Princes Risborough,
Buckinghamshire,
England.
Beethoven’s shopping note
Sir, – Please Tallis the composer puns are Gounod for good (they’re all Grieg to me). Gluck to all your Bizet amusicians! – Yours, etc,
JOHN O’BYRNE,
Mount Argus Court,
Harold’s Cross,
Dublin 6W.
Sir, – Surely Beethoven was too Bizet for Chopin? – Yours, etc,
MARGARET SACCONE,
Mount Ovel,
Rochestown,
Co Cork.
Discrimination against diabetics?
Sir, – Unlike Dr Anna Clarke (January 19th), I thought Brian O’Connell’s piece, “Is Ireland failing its heroin addicts?” (Life & Culture, January 9th) was commendable.
If Dr Clarke thinks the comments in the article were intended to sully the image of diabetics, then she has clearly misunderstood. The whole point of the analogy is that no one thinks any less of people unfortunate enough to suffer from diabetes. The philosophy described by Dr Christopher Luke and Dr João Goulão is based on the principle that addiction is a disease, and drug addicts should be treated with the same level of sympathy and support as sufferers of other diseases. Whether or not one agrees with that philosophy, it was quite clear than no one was trying to cast aspersions on people with diabetes.
I am also surprised that Dr Clarke implied that people with diabetes often need to administer insulin in public because “insulin must be taken as an injection at the specified times or risk ill-health, hospitalisation or worse”. While it is true that people with Type 1 diabetes require insulin to survive, even a delay of several hours would not place them at immediate risk. The most common emergency situation encountered by diabetics is hypoglycaemia, or low blood sugar, which is actually caused by insulin treatment rather than the underlying diabetes. If diabetics fail to administer insulin, they will suffer hyperglycaemia, or high blood sugar.
While hyperglycaemia is also very harmful, it takes hours to develop and days to reach a level that poses an immediate threat. I fully agree that there is no reason for diabetics to be ashamed of their need to inject insulin, but the same is true of various other “activities of daily living” that most of us only undertake in private. – Yours, etc,
PAT DIGNAM,
Mahogany Drive,
Marcus Beach,
Queensland,
Australia.
Young at heart
Sir, – I disagree every point Jacky Jones makes regarding ageism (HEALTHplus, November 15th). I am in my 80s and it’s such a joy to hear people remark “you look great” and “you are young at heart”. It never strikes me that they are being patronising. As far as I am concerned they are kind and thoughtful and put a spring in my step. Ms Jones remarked that a young waiter called her “love” and she admonished him – I would have given him a big tip!
I don’t know what age Ms Jones is, but I would hazard a guess that she is much younger that I am – most people are – but thank God I have good health. Growing old is a fact of life and we are all aware of bits falling off with the years.
On descending steps, if someone offers to help me, I may not need it, but thankfully accept it. A seat on a crowded bus is always welcome as are doors held open – although I am careful crossing the road in case a car hits me and a headline reads “Elderly lady knocked down”!
Ms Jones also wrote that strategies that affect old people include invisibility, tokenism, contempt, disdain and physical revulsion – good Lord – what circles does she move in? As long as I have lived, I have never come across even one of those strategies and I certainly have not led a sheltered life.
As an artist, mother of seven children and with 18 grandchildren, I have met all sorts of people: young and old, rich and poor and I never heard a patronising or offensive word about ageism. A sense of humour and a smile go an awfully long way. – Yours, etc,
MAEVE TAYLOR,
St Brendan’s Avenue,
Malahide Road,
Dublin 5.
The family that dines together
Sir, – In your feature on parenting (Sheila Wayman, HEALTHplus, January 3rd) it is suggested that the family should commit to dining together once a week.
Surely this is an insufficient period in which to set discipline and communicate fully with the children, in order to listen to their needs, views and any problems they may have and one of the few times they have your full attention? Apart from teaching them good table manners, dining together also enables parents to ensure they are eating good wholesome meals.
It was a practice in our house that the family always dined in the evening together from an early age until they left home, resulting in open conversation, where we became aware of many things that might not have become known in the daily bustle of a normal family home. In today’s world – where both parents are obliged to work – I think it might reap untold benefits. – Yours, etc,
HELEN ROYLISTON,
Pollnarooma West,
Salthill,
Galway.
History of Ireland in 100 Rejects
Sir, – It seems harsh of Patrick O’Byrne to add Home Rule to the list of Great Irish Failures (January 18th). After all, it seems that the concept’s time has finally come in this, the centenary year of its only successful parliamentary legislation.
For what is Ireland’s real situation now but that of a Home Rule legislature, where all the serious policies are sorted out elsewhere by external authorities leaving us with merely a modicum of autonomy on purely local issues? – Yours, etc,
JOHN COTTER,
Abbey Drive,
Ferrybank,
Waterford.
Irish Independent:
I was absolutely appalled at Minister Michael Noonan’s comments during the week about emigration among young people.
I graduated in November 2009 with a master’s degree in broadcasting. Lecturers and media professionals I worked with throughout the year warned me of the bleak employment prospects, so I took the initiative and emigrated to the Middle East, where I worked as a teacher until December 2011.
While all but two of my graduating class had employment, I sought a job in Qatar where I could work rather than become a drain on the Irish social welfare system.
I came home this Christmas to seek employment but if I cannot get a job, I will most definitely have to emigrate again, so please, do not tell me minister, that this is a “lifestyle choice”.
Last week, I said goodbye to three friends who returned to Australia. All three are well-educated health professionals and left Ireland for the first time in 2009 because of the embargo in the HSE.
Two more leave in March for Australia, having been let go from engineering and accounting positions.
Through tears, we lamented that some day we would all be able to return to Ireland for employment; so until then, Mr Noonan, I suggest that you and your ill-informed cronies in Leinster House ‘get real’ and realise that we, the young people of Ireland, do not emigrate for the lifestyle, but for a life!
Teresa Timmons
Nenagh, Co Tipperary
• Isn’t it wonderful how insightful politicians can be? Following on from Joan Burton’s discovery that school-leavers are opting for the dole as a ‘lifestyle choice’, Michael Noonan has detected that emigration, too, is a ‘lifestyle choice’.
Lesser minds had thought a lack of effective demand had dried up the pool of jobs, but fortunately these giant intellects have allowed us to see past that old-fashioned Keynesian way of thinking.
The mass outbreak of laziness and wanderlust just happened to break out at the same time as the economic crash and the consequent imposition of austerity.
This coincidence caused lesser minds to confuse cause and effect, but luckily we have these two great thinkers to set us straight.
Tim O’Halloran
Dublin 11
I would just like to take issue with some of the content of the article by Brian Hayes in the Irish Independent regarding so-called “car-crash economics”.
The first thing I would like to point out is that nowhere have I seen or heard anybody suggest that taking some unilateral action would “resolve our problems overnight”, as you implied.
From what I have read, those who advocate leaving the euro are fully aware of the gravity of such action and the potential consequences, and I think it is extremely disingenuous for you to misrepresent such people by saying that they present leaving the euro as an “overnight” solution.
You also imply that leaving the euro would lead to difficulty in Ireland attracting foreign investment, yet fail to consider the attraction of relatively cheaper labour costs due to a new, weaker currency.
It is not unreasonable to suggest that, together with our corporate tax and skilled workforce, a significant reduction in labour costs would, in fact, lead to increased foreign direct investment in Ireland.
You say that those proposing to leave the euro should “honestly acknowledge the likely consequences” of such action.
Well, I think you should honestly acknowledge the likely effect of such action on both tourism and exports. You touched on exports but only to say that our exports were a major positive, but failed to acknowledge that the likely outcome of our exports becoming cheaper was a significant increase in those exports levels.
Also, a new, weaker currency would make Ireland a much cheaper place to visit for tourists. In your ‘honest’ assessment of the situation, you neglect to mention this factor at all.
Just as you fail to mention the flip-side of the export coin — the increase in costs of imports. This, I believe, would naturally lead to people turning towards cheaper domestic produce and providing yet another boost for the economy.
If leaving the euro is “car-crash economics” then there is a case for saying that remaining in the euro is ‘Titanic economics’.
The eurozone has stuck an iceberg and is slowly sinking, yet instead of leading the Irish people to the relative safety of a lifeboat, this Government has decided that we should cling to the rails.
It is clear that this Government has a particular course that it intends to pursue when it comes to the euro crisis. The selective omissions from your one-sided article illustrate this nicely, as does the Government’s determination only to give the Irish people a referendum if it is absolutely legally necessary.
Any decision on the future direction of the European Union should be put to the people of this country for approval, regardless of whether there is a legal requirement or not.,
Simon O’Connor
Address with editor
Dear Mr Noonan,
I can’t believe your ignorance of facts.
Obviously, you’re another politician not living in the real world.
You have been a politician for as long as I can remember — after 30 years in national politics, it’s fair to say that you have had your chance.
It is infuriating for Irish expats like myself that you feel the need to speak on our behalf to explain our rationale for leaving our beloved country.
Yes, perhaps people leave Ireland because there is a better quality of lifestyle in other countries.
Prudent economic management, sensible regulation and astute investment in the growth of any country can give its citizens a lifestyle that is attractive enough to keep them at home.
This, just in case nobody told you, is your responsibility, as an elected representative of the people of Ireland.
Therefore, there is a direct link between your failure in your duties and the plight of so many people leaving the country.
I suggest, if you really want to know what people’s motives are for leaving, that you dispatch some of your underlings to the departures area of Dublin Airport. Ask them five questions:
1. Why are you leaving?
2. How long will you be gone?
3. Is the island “too small”, and do you just “want to get off the island”?
4. Are you leaving all of your friends and family? Do you hate them?
5. What would attract you back to Ireland again?
When your underlings report back, I would be interested to see the results.
It’s not rocket science to run a country properly. You can even emulate a successful country like Switzerland where I am living.
Of course, come election time, you will attribute the relatively low 14pc unemployment rate to your own success in government as compared to Greece and Spain, where the rate is even higher.
Just make sure that the underlings factor in all of those Irish people who have left the country as they had no prospects and no confidence in you and your lot to sort your mess out.
For the record, we expats are leaving the country because we don’t want to feel like losers walking around with nothing to do all day. That would be bad enough, but listening to your bullsh*t every evening would be the last straw.
Ninety-nine per cent of Irish people are proud, hard-working folks — drawing dole is not what we want to do. Our country needs serious change and you are incapable of delivering it.
Resign and leave the country with the rest of your cronies. Then you will get to see what it is like to have to restart your life with no family around you.
Good riddance.
Dave Callanan
Switzerland
The Government has created a great deal of unnecessary confusion on the sale of state assets, a requirement imposed on Ireland under the terms of the EU-IMF-ECB but with the details left remarkably vague and uncertain.
All too typically, we have had no real clarification of such important questions as what public property should be sold, how much money should be raised in this way, or how the proceeds should be spent. The Cabinet is now expected to turn its attention to these issues, perhaps as early as tomorrow. It may shed some much-needed light on the subject — if ministers can get their own thoughts in order.
When the question first arose, it was understood that the proposed sales were designed for one purpose only, paying off our debts. That seemed curious, since figures as low as €2bn were suggested for the likely proceeds, a tiny proportion of our crushing public debt.
Many people felt that they could be better devoted to productive investment with a view to job creation. Very few took up a fundamental issue. Which state assets are “strategic” and “non-strategic”? Which do we consider so vital that they must remain the property of the State?
The ESB tops every proposed list of sales and will presumably feature on any list discussed by the Government. Other likely candidates include Bord Gais, Coillte, Dublin Port, and the State’s remaining share of Aer Lingus.
The value of this last, however, is reckoned at a mere €100m.
Last week the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform Brendan Howlin entered the debate — at a tangent. He claimed that the EU-IMF-ECB “troika” had been persuaded to permit part of the proceeds from the sales to be used for job creation.
The troika’s representatives, visiting Dublin, were reluctant to confirm the claim. But this is far from the main point, or points.
In the correct order, the questions are: Which assets does the Government wish to sell? Are state companies to be sold piecemeal or as single entities?
What proportion of the proceeds will go to paying debt, and what proportion to investment? And how much investment would make a palpable contribution to economic recovery?
A sum of €2bn, along with the €5bn remnant of the national pension reserve fund, would not cure our ills. But it would encourage us to believe that the Government has engaged in some serious thought.
Mitt Romney felt so sure of winning the Republican primary in South Carolina that he left the state briefly, to attend to other matters, during the election campaign. The opinion polls showed him heading for a comfortable win.
The polls were not wrong. They merely failed to catch up in time with an unexpected but powerful trend. Opinion switched in the last hours to Newt Gingrich, who won by the remarkable margin of 40pc to 28pc.
This extraordinary turnaround will be the subject of debate for years, perhaps generations.
It has been identified instantly as a crucial point in this year’s presidential election campaign, and historians will research it and write about it with as much enthusiasm as the journalists of today.
Why did Romney lose? He is a dull speaker, criticised for his “robotic” manner. But the Republican Party establishment prefer a candidate in that mould. The term “moderate” may not have much appeal in fundamentalist South Carolina, but the party needs a moderate to stand against President Barack Obama in November.
Romney is a Mormon, something that makes voters uncomfortable. Although the United States is famed for religious tolerance, it is worth remembering that no Jewish candidate, and only one Catholic, has ever made it to the White House.
More strangely, he seems to have suffered at the polls from attacks on him as a “vulture capitalist”, an asset stripper and destroyer of jobs.
Gingrich for his part has an uncertain temper. With a person of his character in front, the race will grow more bitter. The real winner of this primary was Barack Obama.
May I suggest a few extra taxes that the Government may have missed in its recent cash grab? The ‘walking while texting’ tax, for example — to be levied on everyone, since nearly all of us have mobile phones, send texts, and walk, and thus might have an accident and need to access public health services.
The ‘future politician’ tax, which would be levied on all citizens because they might think of going into politics and cost us a fortune in pensions and benefits.
These are laughable and relate to choices we could, rather than do, make. So does the change in the television licence fee arrangements.
Those of us who have never had a television and prefer to read, play the banjo, or in extremis, buy old films and box sets to watch on the computer, will have to pay for something we do not use. The equitable (and with today’s technology, very simple) solution is to charge for a subscription to RTE Player and other online content, for those who actually do wish to use them.
Jennifer Mooney
Leifear, Co Dhún na nGall
As a former redhead, alas now grey and balding, I see nothing wrong with Enda’s comment on hair colour.
Redheads — and Enda comes within that category — are known to be feisty and combative, so what’s the problem? Just back off and leave him alone.
Fionan Hardiman
Maynooth
Well I must be off
best wishes John
