The whitewashing by some politicians of the actions of some of the main protagonists of the last 40 years or so does not excuse the atrocities committed or stimulated by them. Their late life ‘conversions’ will not heal the empty families, the destroyed futures of so many other affected people, the years of economic destruction and the current lawlessness of Northern Ireland from top to bottom.
Is the current generation of politicians simply going to repeat the narrowmindedness of the past and bequeath the sectarian backward looking mess to the next generations?
Like many others I am appalled at the childish insults uttered by our supposed leaders. What sort of image does that send out to the world, about you and me, the ordinary people of Northern Ireland?
Also, like many taxpayers, I despair at the calls for a referendum on Irish unity. We have seen the mess that referendums with their simplistic yes/no answers create. Yes, some people may want a dream united Ireland. Most thinking people would ask what does the population of the Republic want, is it prepared to financially prop up NI? What inducements does it offer to the probable majority who don’t want it? Sinn Féin needs to have a better sales pitch or else this is simply them stirring the pot.
The Irish Language Act has me baffled. Irish culture, language, music etc is valuable. It is of considerable interest to a growing minority in NI but that does not indicate that the language should be seen as the language of the world communication, trade and politics. No-one on the world stage communicates with others, in Scots Gaelic, Welsh, Irish, Catalan, Basque etc. We have seen the vast expenditure in the Republic to promote the use of the Irish language which is not regarded as a huge success. So is this Irish language drive mostly a political statement?
Can we not solve this ‘road block’?
So the message to the party leadership is get a life for us all. Start working for everyone in Northern Ireland. Find solutions to some very difficult sensitive problems and then tackle the ordinary problems of running a properly functioning province. To solve these we are going to have to ask ourselves if we are prepared to make some sacrifice of our own raw feelings or are we going to let our sores fester?
Politicians, this will be your legacy upon which you will be judged.
TOM EKIN
Belfast BT9
Audit report on cost of redress is incomplete
The Comptroller and Auditor General’s report into the cost of redress examines contributions from 18 Catholic religious congregations.
Unless the comptroller has another report in the pipeline, on those who contributed nothing, his examination is incomplete.
I refer to Protestant institutions which contributed zero per cent. They do not feature in the report. Logically, if the 18 religious congregations had also paid nothing, the comptroller (and the media) would have nothing to report.
Former residents of Smyly’s homes in the Dun Laoghaire area were compensated by the Residential Institutions Redress Board, as a
result of physical and sexual abuse they suffered.
The government discussed a possible contribution with Smyly’s in 2005. About £100,000, a sum considered derisory by civil servants, was offered and rejected.
To former residents the issue was irrelevant, as they claimed compensation under a state liability.
The separate scheme of institutional contribution in return for indemnity, into which Smyly’s did not pay (alongside other Protestant institutions subject to abuse allegations), was voluntary.
I do not see those points reflected in the report or in ministerial comments.
The comptroller’s report lists the number of applicants per institution in a ‘top 10’, all Catholic. Unless he is announcing the winners (or in this case losers) in an unpopularity contest, he should have listed all institutions. Also required is the total cost per institution and costs of redress per applicant, per institution.
Had that been published, the general public (and the media) would be in a better position to inform a sense of collective indignation.
DR NIALL MEEHAN
Griffith College, Dublin 8
Irish society needs to accept collective culpability
Patrick Murphy’s ‘Tuam baby’s story reflects Ireland’s shameful history’ (March 18) is to me quite accurate.
The Barnardo’s report of the late 19th and early 20th century of death in England reported very high mortality rates. There was one hospital, in Manchester that had a 100 per cent mortality rate in newborns.
This does not take away from Mr Murphy’s view that we in Ireland have nothing to be proud of when it comes to social justice. It was not so long ago that wives were called ‘chattels’ to be done with as the husband decided. A cruel time for women and children.
The Bon Secour awfulness is reflective of how children of unmarried women were viewed not just by the religious but in society.
Mr Murphy points to his exchange with a ‘survivor’.
Finger pointing at this unfolding tragedy is not on. Irish society needs to accept collective culpability here.
How Mr Murphy gets the IRA into this is maybe not surprising yet it does show his colours.
MANUS McDAID
Derry City
Meaningless borders
The EU has promised to make an example of the UK to deter others from leaving – inevitably a very hard Brexit.
In this there is double standards as the high financial markets, thanks to the internet, know no boundaries. Borders are meaningless to the stock market speculators and vulture funds. Those affected will be the general working population, the exporters, the agri-food industry, the manufactures etc. Therefore, Ireland will suffer greatly if custom controls are reintroduced. It would be more practical to treat Ireland as a single entity and to expand the already strict custom controls at the British points of entry – ports and airports. We have too many border crossings. The British army could not control them, never mind a fledging customs operation. Britain would probably prefer this option otherwise the British army may have to return to protect the crossings.
If the stock markets can be accommodated why can’t the unique case of Ireland also be allowed?
JOHN-PATRICK BELL
Manorhamilton, Co Leitrim
Acts of terrorism
In reading all the commentary on the death of Martin McGuinness I was struck by some British and northern Irish politicians who heavily qualified their messages of condolence by emphasising that they would not, could not and never, ever supported terrorism. I reflected on this and think these people should think again. They have supported, in the past, actions carried out by the RUC, UDR,
B Specials and the British army. Did these organisations not terrorise citizens of the north on many well documented occasions, mostly but not exclusively, perpetrated against the Catholic population? I guess when unionists and their fellow Conservatives consider acts of terrorism it is not terrorism if the person doing the terrorising wears the uniform of the Crown and acts with impunity in the name of the State.
PETER McEVOY
Newry, Co Down
