Sir, – Your editorial on the neglect of the National Archives was absolutely spot on (“The Irish Times view on the National Archives: a vital resource which has been consistently neglected”, December 29th). As a member of the last National Archives Advisory Council, I witnessed that neglect for myself.
The basic problem is the position of the National Archives as a small backwater in the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, making it subject to all the interminable budget squabbles, pecking-order disputes and territorial jealousies that mark the upper echelons of the Irish public service at its worst. Until its superb staff have the independence to make their own decisions on policy, budget and hiring, it will remain a shadow of what it should be.
The question is whether our elected representatives are willing to take on the Civil Service to give it that independence. – Yours, etc,
JOHN GRENHAM,
With a glut of electric cars on sale for under €30,000, will Irish people make the switch?
STIs on the rise: ‘It’s seen as something shameful or dirty, or they’re embarrassed to be going to a clinic’
‘I learned to hide my Irish accent, or at least to feel deeply ashamed of it’
David W. Higgins: Moving to Australia? Beware, their economic fairytale won’t last forever
Drumcondra,
Dublin 9.
Sir, – I was delighted to see your editorial on the National Archives.
As a professional genealogist, I regularly engage with them.
A new website promised at the beginning of 2024 has yet to appear. Coding errors and dead links abound on the current site.
Ordering a copy of a will (if an in-person visit isn’t possible) requires printing a form and posting it with a cheque. One of mine from the beginning of this year was never cashed. If there was an online ordering system, it would pay for itself in no time.
A request to access particular records was returned with the response “We don’t know where they are at the moment”, and the facility is so understaffed that they close at lunchtime most days in the week, never mind being available to people who cannot visit on weekdays.
All of these things could be fixed by the application of more money.
The Irish State got off to a terrible start by blowing up the predecessor to the National Archives, and we owe it to ourselves to do better. – Yours, etc,
CLAIRE BRADLEY,
Swords,
Co Dublin.
Bylaws and homelessness
Sir, – Further to “Bylaws would ban ‘well-meaning’ on-street soup kitchen runs to Dublin homeless” (Olivia Kelly, News, December 27th), legal challenges to these proposed bylaws are inevitable, as they violate constitutional rights and international human rights standards, as they are an actual attack on the dignity and safety of the persons in need of and using such volunteer services.
Homelessness is not an isolated or individual issue that requires bylaws for dignity and safety, it’s a societal crisis.
A record number of people now find themselves living on the streets or in temporary shelters and accommodation, the record rising year on year, not because of some inherent flaw in their character, but because our political and economic systems prioritise profits over human welfare.
We live in a world where policies that perpetuate scarcity are actively encouraged.
The housing crisis is not an accident, it is the result of deliberate choices that allow profits to come before people’s basic human needs.
The constant under-resourcing of vital services is another significant problem.
The Government has systematically underfunded services that could help homeless people regain the dignity and safety stripped from them.
Shelters, mental health services, addiction support, and housing solutions remain chronically underfunded, while the rhetoric of “scarcity” is used to justify the limited support available.
And this is where dignity and safety fall by the wayside.
If we truly valued these principles, we would ensure that those who are homeless have access to services that allow them to rebuild their lives. Yet the political and administrative will to make these necessary changes is lacking, and the proposed bylaw will merely service the change of aesthetic to a pleasing one for tourism.
One of the most alarming aspects of this ongoing crisis, if safety is of concern, is the failure of the system to protect homeless children. Thousands of children are living in temporary accommodation, often in unsafe and unsanitary conditions. They are at risk not only from the direct effects of homelessness, but also from the emotional and physical harm caused by the instability of their circumstances.
Agencies such as Tusla are responsible for child wellbeing and safety, and remain chronically understaffed and under-resourced. There is a constant shortage of social workers, and those working in the system are overwhelmed by the sheer volume of cases they are required to manage.
As a result, children, our most vulnerable population, generally voiceless and unseen are left without the protection and care they desperately need.
The systemic neglect and indifference we witness today are a direct result of political choices, not inevitable consequences of circumstance.
Perhaps the real reason we fail to protect the homeless and their dignity is because they represent a challenge to the status quo.
If homelessness is addressed, we are confronted with the deep inequalities embedded within our political and economic systems. We are forced to acknowledge that profit-driven policies and underfunding of essential services are directly responsible for the suffering of so many. This is a truth that those in power would rather not confront, because doing so would require a radical shift in priorities.
The call for a new bylaw might sound appealing to some as a solution to the problem of “visible” homelessness.
However, creating more legislation to control and manage the homeless population and how, when, where and what services they can access will not solve the underlying issues. We need a fundamental change in how we approach homelessness, not as a social issue to be swept under the rug away from the view of tourists, journalists and the general public, but as a human rights issue that demands urgent attention.
Until we make these changes, we will continue to live in a society where the homeless are treated as an afterthought, their dignity and safety sacrificed in the name of profit. And that is something we can no longer allow to continue. – Yours, etc,
MIKE EDWARDS,
Director,
Roscrea Community Hub,
Roscrea,
Co Tipperary.
Reforming the Seanad
Sir, – As the political scramble and backtracking for the Seanad election continues (“Fine Gael senator Seán Kyne reverses decision to quit politics and will run again for Seanad”, News, December 29th), I recently finished reading Andree Sheehy-Skeffington’s biography of Owen Sheehy-Skeffington, and noted the former politician’s assessment of Seanad Éireann as being “thwarted by the use and abuse of the Party Whips”.
In the weeks ahead, as ballot papers make their way across the country for the 1,200 voters for the majority of seats in the 27th Seanad, it’s worth remembering the Seanad was intended to be a place for independent voices and expertise.
While it is of course theoretically possible to put in place legislation to prevent candidates for the Seanad and eventual senators using their party names or logos on official Oireachtas letters or other similar measures, the reality is that political parties can simply just group their candidates and eventual senators together unofficially and pressure them to vote in line with the diktats of their party leadership.
So, what is the solution to ensuring the Seanad serves as an effective second house of the Oireachtas with independent voices as envisaged by the founders of the State and Mr Sheehy-Skeffington?
The first step would be to remove any allowances for party leaders in the Seanad and give the Seanad the power to elect the Leader and Deputy Leader of the House by secret ballot rather than appointment by government. These are just two steps that would move the Seanad towards being an independent and truly meaningful body.
The question is whether any political party will take those necessary steps. To date, it doesn’t appear any party will step up and lead by example, with all major parties currently represented in the Dáil nominating only party representatives – primarily failed Dáil candidates – to contest this Seanad election. None, it seems, had the vision to choose independent candidates.
Sadly, regardless of party colours or branding, talking the talk means more to our politicians than walking the walk. – Yours, etc,
TOMÁS HENEGHAN,
East Wall,
Dublin 3.
Inclusive education
A chara, – It was rather serendipitous to see the article on St Patrick’s Cathedral Grammar School, originally published in January, resurface recently as one of the most-read stories of the year (“‘It was the right thing to do’: The Dublin private school that dropped its fees”, Education, January 9th). The experience of this historic school, which transitioned to the free scheme a decade ago, underscores the arguments against subsidising private education and highlights the benefits of prioritising accessibility and equity in our education system.
The article reveals how removing fees at St Patrick’s expanded access to a more diverse student body, removed financial barriers, and fostered a more inclusive ethos.
St Patrick’s transition allowed the school to grow its enrolment, improve extracurricular opportunities, and better serve its community, all without sacrificing academic standards. This challenges the odd notion that exclusivity is somehow necessary for excellence.
To thrive as a society, Ireland must prioritise educational equality, ensuring all children have access to high-quality education without financial barriers. International studies show that this is the way to go and as St Patrick’s demonstrates, it does not come at the expense of excellence but rather enhances our education system for the benefit of all. – Yours, etc,
REAMONN O’LUAN,
Churchtown,
Dublin 14.
Sir, – Brian O’Brien’s rather circuitous argument justifying private education doesn’t stand up to scrutiny (Letters, December 28th).
The absence of a definition for a “top school” leads us to assume that it is merely a rich one. By the measure of volume output alone, State schools have produced more scientists, musicians, artists and sportspeople, politicians, etc, than any combination of the privilege of the institutions of the wealthy. And where funding affords, second-level graduates have gone on to further education to burnish their talents, also a resource-dependent inhibitor to advancement and academic or sporting excellence and achievement.
This point is further advanced by the PR-friendly, deeply cynical and tokenistic intake of a few nominal students on subsidised scholarships. The achievements of these disadvantaged students within these private schools is an absolute illustration that given any reasonable educational support in State schools those same disadvantaged children would also advance and achieve.
The greatest lesson from the debate on subsidised private education is that the access to money and the use to which it is put to maximise the benefits to the common good is a policy issue. Children are sent to private schools not because children are super-talented or outstanding in any way but because their parents have the resources to send them there – with State assistance. This privilege may result in some children reaching “notable” levels not possible for others in less resourced institutions or even for others equally resourced. Children have prospered and achieved in State schools despite their socioeconomic handicaps and lack of educational resources, including qualified teachers or physical infrastructure. Imagine how many more would have excelled had the resources diverted to the privileged minority cocooned in private schools been invested in State schools. All children are born equal but some are made more equal than others according to the means of their parents and with the complicity of the State. The issue is not what individual parents chose to spend their aftertax resources on but what the State prioritises to spend its citizens’ tax on. How many more “diamonds” or Nobel prize winners would have been harvested from State schools if resourced like private schools?
The philosophical argument central to this issue is not any reduction in standards or educational opportunities in private schools, but’s rather the increased targeting of resources to increase opportunities in State schools, where parents also contribute their tax money through “voluntary” contributions and fundraisers just to keep the heating on, rather than building additional all-weather pitches, dedicated sports coaches or other comforts far removed from basic educational necessities.
I attended a private, boarding fee-paying Catholic school where “day boys” were not charged but if they had been I couldn’t have afforded to attend. The greatest State investment in national education was the introduction of free bus transport which was revolutionary and progressive and set the foundation for the education of the nation’s children and set this country on the path to modernisation and economic freedom. Isn’t it cruelly ironic that in the context of unimaginable national tax intake and the ongoing subsidising of private schools exceptionalism and privilege, that the State has withdrawn free school bus transport for the less fortunate and rural citizens of this State, forcing them back into cars in a time of climate emergency, by introduced fees on school-going children to help raise funds in a “value for money audit”? A mature Republic should refuse this ongoing targeted support of private elites and sectional interests to the detriment of more deserving others. – Yours, etc,
TOMÁS FINN,
Cappataggle,
Ballinasloe,
Co Galway.
New year intentions
Sir, – Enough of the healthy lifestyle tips for 2025, the rigorous exercise routines that will alter my body type, the diet regimes that will bring me back to twice my birth weight, enough already from the dry January sanctimonious ones and born-again vegans with their puritanical sense of superiority who can’t stop telling the rest of us about it.
Enough.
I’m okay with the old me, and as we’re not yet into the new year, I don’t want to hear another word from, or about, the new you. – Yours, etc,
ANNE MARIE KENNEDY.
Craughwell.
Co Galway.
Sir, – Making new year resolutions is all fine and dandy; keeping them is a different kettle of fish entirely.
So, bearing this in mind, for the next 12 months, I resolve to walk past a gym at least twice a week. – Yours, etc,
PAUL DELANEY,
Dalkey,
Co Dublin.