Sir, - W. Murphy, in his (or her) letter of June 2nd, wonders if previous contributors to this debate have any real appreciation of the scale of the problem. Describing those of us on the "pro" side of the divide as "the average Irish Times reader, usually a liberal Christian living in a leafy suburb far removed from the areas affected by bulk immigration", he goes on to cite his own experiences in Britain during the 1950s, when the leafy London suburb to which he had emigrated was "overrun by one of the first wave of former `Empire' immigrants."
In the authoritative voice of a true veteran he then predicts a similar occurrence here in the next few years when Romania and other east-European countries become members of the EU and their economic refugees "flock" to our shores as of right. Finally, to all us armchair liberals, he issues the dire warning, "You ain't seen nothin' yet," a situation that does not worry him in the slightest since he has seen it all before, worn the T-shirt, eaten the TV dinner, etc.
Neither I nor, I think, anyone else is claiming to be an expert on this subject. How could we be? It is an entirely new situation for us. But I would just like to remind W. Murphy that the type of language he uses to demonstrate his point is exactly the type of inflammatory sentiment that British MPs have recently undertaken to exclude from their vocabulary. They did this on the basis that any short-term benefits that might accrue to them from taking advantage of peoples' fears are far outweighed by the long-term negative effect on their society as a whole - namely, incitement to hatred, further racial prejudice and even acts of violence.
As a wise man once said: "Words are all we have." Let us be careful with them. - Yours, etc.,
Leo Jameson, Homefarm Park, Drumcondra, Dublin 9.