Sir, – Brendan Butler is almost correct in his assertion that Irish people are fully committed to the EU project, as it has existed since we joined it (Letters, March 21st). That project is currently undergoing re-examination as a consequence of Russian actions, and US attitudes to Europe. We have, it should be noted, consistently dragged our feet on anything relating to defence co-operation in an EU context, to the extent of including in the Constitution a clause pre-empting our membership of any EU common defence pact, should such be adopted by the European Council: “The State shall not adopt a decision taken by the European Council to establish a common defence pursuant to Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union where that common defence would include the State.” Membership of an “EU army”, in the unlikely event of such being created, could not therefore be approved by the Oireachtas. Setting up such strawman to be “shot down”, so to speak, as has been done by many commentators, simply diverts from the real issues we face.
The statement that “Ireland can’t dine out on peacenik status any longer” (Finn McRedmond, “The universe where Ireland can bask in its peacenik status is gone”, Opinion & Analysis, March 20th) is not a “dismissive assertion”. It is rather a valid, if somewhat glibly worded, point to make in the face of the circumstances in which Europe as a whole, not just the EU, currently finds itself. In this context, Ireland need to question whether the unarmed “neutrality” policy, followed to date under the comfort blanket provided by Nato, is viable going forward, and whether we can, or should, develop adequate military capacity to give meaning and teeth to a declared policy of neutrality. More realistically, in my view, we need to give serious consideration as to what extent we should co-ordinate with like-minded European states in defending our shared interests, and what capacity we need to develop in that context. Government needs then to resource the Defence Forces to meet the demands of whichever policy is adopted. Whatever about the constitutional constraint on EU common defence, we should also at least rid ourselves of the triple lock and return sovereignty to the Oireachtas. In the meantime, high office holders, academics, columnists and politicians should at least have the “cop on” to desist from assigning a high moral status to what has become a “head in the sand” approach to defence and security. – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL O’DWYER,
Clogheen,
Look inside: Quaint stone cottage with guest unit at foot of Mayo mountain for €275,000
‘In Irish motorsport he was our greatest figure’: Martin McCarthy pays tribute to his friend Eddie Jordan
Matt Williams: Rugby teaches us to be driven, resilient and healthy - and to teach
Over-60s can borrow against the equity in their home. But should they?
Cork.
The presidency and a united left
A chara, – The closer we get to the presidential election, the clearer it becomes that the left parties and Independents in Dáil Éireann will have to unite behind an agreed candidate, if there’s to be any prospect of avoiding the return of an establishment figure from the current Government alliance of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Lowry Independents.
Tánaiste Simon Harris has already confirmed that Fine Gael will be running a candidate and some names being mentioned are Frances Fitzgerald, Seán Kelly and Mairéad McGuinness. Fianna Fáil, meanwhile, are casting around looking for a suitable candidate, now that Taoiseach Micheál Martin has ruled himself out, and we can be fairly certain too that it won’t be former taoiseach Bertie Ahern. The latest name being mentioned is Cynthia Ní Mhurchú and she would certainly be a formidable candidate, as she proved in the European elections last year.
Faced with formidable women from Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil – quite possibly Mairéad McGuinness and Cynthia Ní Mhurchú – the only hope for the left opposition would be a formidable independent-minded figure such as Catherine Connolly. She commands respect across the Dáil, as proved when she won the secret ballot for the position of leas-cheann comhairle in the previous Dáil. The Galway woman would be a passionate voice for that large section of the electorate who do not support the current government.
Very much in the same mould as President Higgins, Catherine Connolly would certainly be a worthy successor to him and a reminder to the present political establishment that Ireland belongs to all of us and not just to a few. – Is mise,
JOHN GLENNON,
Hollywood,
Co Wicklow.
Remembering Eddie Jordan
Sir, – If Jackie Charlton and his Irish team gave us a fantastic era in Irish soccer, Eddie Jordan did the same with Jordan Racing in Formula One (“Eddie Jordan: Business maverick, wannabe rock star, Formula One legend”, Justin Hynes, Sport, March 20th). Starting off with his green “Irish” car and moving on to the yellow version, it wasn’t about winning world championships, just the odd grand prix win or even a podium finish were enough. It was a golden era. All done on a shoestring budget compared to his heavily funded rivals. – Yours, etc,
BRIAN CULLEN,
Dublin 16.
A chara, – My father loved recounting how he mentored a young Eddie Jordan after Eddie’s father passed away. Eddie asked my father if he should stay in the bank or pursue his motorsport interest. Without hesitation, my father advised he stay in the secure bank job. The rest is history. – Yours, etc,
LEO LAWLER,
Dublin 3.
Psychiatry and the law
Sir, – We agree with Prof Brendan Kelly’s concerns regarding the Mental Health Bill 2024 (“Admitting a patient without consent and not treating them isn’t ‘care’ – it’s imprisonment” (Opinion & Analysis, March 21st). The Irish College of GPs made a submission to the Mental Health Commission in October 2024 raising this point, among others. It does not make sense to deem a person’s mental illness severe enough to require admission yet not require this illness to be treated.
Mental health legislation should provide for timely, accountable treatments for all patients.
This includes people with psychosis who have poor or no insight into their condition while unwell, markedly affecting their decision-making capacity. Patient outcomes for those with first episode psychosis are proven to be better with early intervention as duration of untreated psychosis is thought to be neurotoxic.
We would not wait for someone with an identified physical disease to deteriorate to a life-threatening stage to intervene.
Effective mental health services cost money and early intervention is crucial. There is a complete lack of funding of mental health in general practice, despite approximately 90 per cent of mental healthcare taking place in a primary care setting.
The remarkable success of the chronic disease management programme for physical illness in general practice has shown what can be achieved when appropriate funding is put in place, but again mental health is neglected. In a modern health system in the 21st century, this should not be tolerated. – Yours, etc,
Dr AOIFE O’SULLIVAN,
Mental Health Clinical Lead
HSE/Irish College of GPs,
Dr BRIAN OSBORNE,
Assistant Medical Director,
Irish College of GPs,
Dublin 2.
Urban decay and dereliction levies
Sir, – Your series on dereliction has been equal parts inspiring and dispiriting, but sadly almost as overdue as effective enforcement by some of our most errant county councils (“The Irish Times view on dereliction levies: why are councils failing to act?”, March 20th; “More than 14,500 properties are vacant across Dublin”, News, February 8th).
What is perplexing is the consistent focus in our society on rights: the rights of landowners (to allow their properties to fall into dereliction and decay) and the rights of councils to remedy such dereliction (which rights are seemingly enforced more as a matter of exception than the rule).
Hand in hand with those rights, landowners have duties to ensure their lands do not become derelict and councils have duties to use their statutory powers to combat dereliction where it occurs.
What will it take for our society to take duties as seriously we do rights?
If chief executives of county councils were meaningfully responsible for the performance of the organisations they lead, would the current situation be as it is?
We are also overdue for a coalition of like-minded individuals to come together to make it clear to those with duties in our society that we will no longer stand by and see those duties disregarded and ignored. Who is with me? – Is mise,
GIUSEPPE SANTORO,
Drumcondra,
Dublin 9.
Sir, – Your recent editorial on the failure of the derelict sites levy highlights a stark reality: Ireland’s housing crisis will not be solved by weak, unenforced penalties that property speculators can simply ignore. For over 30 years, the levy has been an almost complete failure, with local authorities either unwilling or unable to enforce it.
This ongoing failure demonstrates that Ireland needs strong emergency powers, not just incremental policy tweaks.
When the banking system faced collapse, the State responded with the Credit Institutions (Stabilisation) Act, which temporarily suspended normal property rights to stabilise the financial system.
The housing crisis is no less urgent. If a government could override property rights to save banks, why can it not do the same to ensure people have homes?
A Housing Emergency Act could provide the necessary legal framework, introducing, for example, compulsory temporary use orders, allowing the State to take control of long-term vacant properties for housing use.
It could also provide for fast-track compulsory purchase orders, cutting through the bureaucratic delays that currently protect dereliction. Forced sales for neglected properties could also be included, ensuring that institutional landlords and developers either put housing to use or sell to those who will.
Like the bank bailout, such powers could be strictly time-limited – a temporary but necessary intervention to deal with an exceptional crisis (or “disaster” as President Higgins called it). The alternative is to continue relying on weak, voluntary measures that have already failed for decades.
The State has previously demonstrated that it can act decisively when financial stability is at risk. It is time to show the same resolve when people’s basic right to housing is at stake. – Yours, etc,
K NOLAN,
Dublin 15.
The Occupied Territories Bill
Sir, – It seems that more of the Trump deflection playbook has rubbed off on the Taoiseach after their recent meeting. Micheál Martin’s latest pronouncement on the Occupied Territories Bill (“Taoiseach says Irish Bill will not affect immediate decisions of Israel on Gaza”, News, March 21st) is textbook deflection from the fact that his Government has no intention of passing this Bill into law.
Not even the most vociferous opponent of Israel’s ongoing occupation would contend that passing the Bill would stop the renewed Israeli attacks on Gaza. However, as the UN’s special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories Francesca Albanese said in a recent interview, Mr Martin’s government needs to be asked what it is doing to comply with international law.
In July 2024, the International Court of Justice declared that Israel’s occupation is illegal and that all states should refrain from providing aid or assistance that help maintain the illegal occupation.
So why is Ireland trading with Israel at all? Why are we facilitating their government in selling bonds to finance their illegal occupation? Why are we allowing them to transport weapons through our territory to continue their killing campaign both in Gaza and in the other occupied Palestinian territories? As Ms Albanese also said this past week, Ireland needs to do better for Palestine. – Yours, etc,
SÉAMUS WHITE,
Dublin 7.
