Madam, - In hurling, it's called playing the man, not the ball. Michael O'Leary's letter of July 12th underlines his reputation for approaching every issue with an open mouth.
My column of July 10th made the very obvious but often overlooked point that flying is not in fact cheap, despite being misrepresented as such. It is a valuable resource that ought not be squandered.
The aviation industry has abused the €35 billion annual subsidy it enjoys by way of tax-free fuel in the EU alone by flogging cheaper and cheaper packages and refusing to pay its share towards cleaning up the pollution it creates. Even though only one in 20 people will ever fly, aviation is the world's fastest rising contributor to emissions.
Tweaking fuel efficiency on individual aircraft does nothing to stop the overall rise in emissions, which is driven by ultra-low fares. Mr O'Leary is also labouring under the curious impression that his airline built Dublin Airport.
Rising oil prices are putting an end to the fantasy of dirt-cheap aviation, notwithstanding the huge tax breaks. Of course, sky-high demand from the airline industry for fuel is speeding up global depletion rates of this strictly finite resource. All the bluff, bullying and bluster in the world won't put more oil in the ground.
Rather than addressing the arguments in my article, Mr O'Leary instead engages in name-calling, with a barrage of ad homineminsults, including: "eco-nut", "eco-loony", "eco-twit", etc. I'm sorry to let the facts once again intrude on a good rant, but like Mr O'Leary I am a middle-class, middle-aged entrepreneur, businessman and employer, as well as a father of young children.
I happen to also subscribe to the view that we borrow this world from our children and their children, and we all have a moral duty of stewardship that goes beyond the narrow pursuit of profit at all costs. The more successful or fortunate we are, the greater are our obligations, not vice versa.
This is not an original observation. In 1907, US president Theodore Roosevelt said: "The conservation of natural resources is the fundamental problem. Unless we solve that problem it will avail us little to solve all others".
Warnings about a looming climate-driven disaster are, sadly, emanating not from gibbering eco-loons wearing sackcloth, but from the overwhelming majority of the world's climate scientists. The evidence is there for anyone to read. Clutching at straws, or demonising the bearers of this bad news (as in Dr William Reville's rather nasty recent piece on "eco fundamentalism") adds nothing to the debate.
The undoubted talents, energy and PR skills of a man like Michael O'Leary could be enormously helpful in rousing the public from its collective slumber in time to avert a calamity - if only he would open his eyes and open his mind.- Yours, etc,
JOHN GIBBONS,
Dún Laoghaire,
Co Dublin.
****
Madam, - Dear, oh dear: Michael O'Leary is in high dudgeon about those who dare question aviation's contribution to climate change. He describes them as eco-loonies, eco-twits, eco-nuts and eco-clowns using eco-babble to make their case. Is he right? Or is he being eco-nomical with the truth? Perhaps he should calm down and have a cup of tea.- Yours, etc,
BRENDAN M. REDMOND,
Hazelbrook Road,
Terenure,
Dublin 6w.
****
Madam, - Well done to Michael O'Leary for calling a spade a spade or, in this context, the CO2 huffers and puffers the hot-air balloons they really are! Where any problem exists - and Mr O'Leary is not questioning the fact that there is a problem with CO2 emissions - what we need is effective action, as opposed to merely expedient action that protects powerful vested interests and takes softer and politically safer options.
Mr O'Leary has shown in his pursuit of competition in air travel that the interests of the consumer, the ordinary Joe or Josephine Passenger, are not at all the same as the interests of Joe and Josephine Trade Union or Management.
We need the same cutting-edge, no-nonsense, no-frills realism in addresssing problems in the health service as we do in the air industry or environment. There are precedents for appointing business men and women to public bodies for their experience and expertise. May I suggest that Michael O'Leary be drafted into the Health Service Executive and given a chance to address the problem of hospital trolleys as opposed to baggage trolleys? - Yours, etc,
MARGARET HICKEY,
Castleowen,
Blarney,
Co Cork.
****
Madam, — I enjoy nothing more than a piece of well-aimed invective - the sort Michael O'Leary excels in. His letter in last Saturday's Irish Timesis a fine example. As always, his points appear humorous and generally sensible until you root around a bit under the gloss.
He argues that replacing the Ryanair fleet with modern, more efficient aircraft has a positive effect on emissions per customer. This belies the fact that the acquisition of new aircraft carries a high additional cost to the environment in terms of the embodied energy in their manufacture, not to mention the effects of decommissioning the old fleet.
He describes criticism of cheap flights on the grounds of environmental impacts as "mumbo-jumbo", "delusion", "eco-babble" promoted by "eco-twits", "eco-nuts", "eco-clowns", "eco kill-joys" and "eco-loonies". However, he was hoist upon his own form of jet-propulsion in his parting paragraph, wherein he wondered if The Irish Times"could encourage sensible, fact-based debate, rather than providing a soap-box for . . . ranting nonsense and false claims". Delicious! - Yours, etc,
DAVID LAWLOR,
Breeoge,
Co Sligo.
****
Madam, - Michael O'Leary of Ryanair reveals to us in his letter of July 12th that Ireland is an island. As such, he claims that the only way to access the country is to fly.
He might try the ferry sometime and do his bit against climate change. - Yours, etc,
DENIS HANRAHAN,
Windsor,
England.
****
Madam, - I hope you made Michael O'Leary pay for that carry-on verbiage in excess of the usual allowance. - Yours, etc,
BEN HEMMENS,
Graz,
Austria.