A chara, – In “Ireland in the 1980s was backward, poor and stagnant. Some politicians want to bring us back there” (Opinion & Analysis, December 1st), Michael McDowell refers to the “failed structure of the Irish economy” in former years, listing many semi-State enterprises and State monopolies, including, among others, the ESB, Dublin Gas, An Post, Telecom Éireann, RTÉ, CIÉ, Bord na Móna, ports, shipping companies, and Aer Lingus. His article is, perhaps inadvertently, a negative critique of working people and their trade unions.
I am not a historian. However, I am in my 79th year and remember the poverty, the tenement buildings, the slum housing without sanitation or electricity, the premature deaths of young children, and the not-so-old adults, and this was in Dublin. It was much worse in rural towns and villages throughout Ireland.
The fledgling Irish State, not long established, endured an economic war with Britain, followed by the second World War, which brought with it rationing, and a waning economy. There was no rush by the hoarders of capital or other exploiters of labour to invest in any of the above projects. As a consequence, there was mass emigration to England, Australia, and the US.
All of these enterprises were established by the new State and with it came the electrification of Ireland, the demolishing of the tenements, and the massive house-building projects creating large housing estates through the towns and cities: in Dublin alone, we had the huge estates of Crumlin, Drimnagh, Walkinstown, Bluebell, Ballyfermot, Cabra, Finglas, Ballymun, Darndale, Santry, Coolock, Raheny, Donaghmede, Kilbarrack and many more. With these housing estates came the hospitals, schools, shopping centres, and roads. The above enterprises engaged their workforce from the denizens of these estates and the Irish diaspora abroad.
Crystal ball 2025: Our team of pundits make their predictions for the sporting year
The first Leaving Cert 100 years ago: girls-only exams, botany tests and imperial measures
Latin America’s female new wave finds its voice
Ireland and a Trump presidency: ‘Michael O’Leary is somebody I think Donald Trump would be in awe of’
All of these enterprises were and are trade union organised workplaces with decent wages, good conditions, and security of employment. Through the labour movement, second, and third-level education became available to all, and with this came the requirement for more teachers, doctors, nurses, gardaí, and military personnel. They were represented by trade unions or similar organisations.
Consequently, their children have benefited and are now the workforce engaged in these enterprises and professions. They are the new well-educated, enlightened working class who seek more from Irish society.
Unfortunately, many cannot afford to buy or rent a home of their own and are forced to live with their parents or emigrate.
The workforce and the populace in this country owe a great deal to the trade union movement through the benefits gained by representation and agitation: good working conditions, union pay rates, a minimum of four weeks of paid holidays, and 10 paid public holidays, equality and safety in the workplace, pensions and paid sick leave, and a minimum wage.
Throughout my working life, I have been a proud trade union activist, representative, and organiser in several trade unions and the labour movement through which the principle of equality for all within the workplace and throughout society regardless, of gender, race or religious beliefs was agitated for and is now firmly established. I am very proud of my input as to what has been achieved to date. – Is mise,
DESMOND HUGHES,
Donaghmede,
Dublin 13.
Sir, – Michael McDowell contrasts the “backward, poor and stagnant” Irish economy of the 1970s and 1980s with our current model.
As one who lived through this period as a public servant and union member, I take issue with the statement that the trade unions were among those who “were comfortable with the status quo” and “opposed having tax rates reduced”.
Your columnist does acknowledge the widespread tax evasion of the era but fails to recall the leading role of the trade unions in the PAYE tax marches of the 1980s protesting at the fact that almost all income tax being collected was from PAYE workers.
He also fails to acknowledge the fact that those evading taxes were, in general, those working in the private sector.
Thanks largely to those tax protests and the subsequent tribunals, we have now reached a point where tax evasion is not nearly as endemic.
That has been a very significant factor in moving to our current economic model.
Public ownership of key infrastructure and services is not a bad thing, as we now know following the sell-off of our telecoms infrastructure.
The past may be a different country, but the reasons are not quite as simplistic as your columnist suggests. – Yours, etc,
ADRIAN CONWAY,
Kilcloon,
Co Meath.
Sir, – Michael McDowell writes that a State-dominated economy was the source of the Republic’s economic woes into the 1980s. I seem to recall something about two centre-right parties, or their Civil War antecedents, running the show for the first 60 years after independence. – Yours, etc,
DONAL O’TOOLE
Laramie
Wyoming, US.
A chara, – I read with interest Michael McDowell’s article on Ireland in the 1980s.
It is true that the heavy hand of the State was involved in many sectors of Irish life and growth was stymied in the 1980s.
Today the opposite is the case, and it is hard to the think of any sector that is State-dominated. Mr McDowell asserts that there are politicians on the left who want to re-establish this failed “State-dominated economy”.
However, it may also be the case that there are not just politicians but many citizens who are concerned that despite our apparent “wealth”, we are witnessing some serious and significant issues: a growing homelessness problem, a severe lack of housing, significant commuting issues and a failure to invest in infrastructure. It is worth mentioning that many Irish people (approximately 60,000 in 2023) are choosing a life abroad, which ironically is reminiscent of rates last sent in the 1980s. In the 1980s, people who did have employment could afford a decent house and afford to raise a family.
The swinging of the economic pendulum has resulted in an Ireland today that is beneficial to some, is just about affordable to others, and is unbearable or unaffordable to everyone else. It is perhaps high time to swing the pendulum back toward a more affordable and equitable society. – Is mise,
ROB MAC GIOLLARNÁTH,
Abhainn an Scáil,
Co Chiarraí.
Seanad reform – a lost opportunity
Sir, – Brendan Wright (Letters, January 2nd) asks the crucial question on Seanad voting rights – when will the discrimination against non-college graduates end?
However, much like those who fail to show up to vote at election time, those seeking a vote in Seanad elections had a golden opportunity only recently to put the issue on the agenda, and most, it seems, failed to show up.
In October 2024, the Seanad Electoral (University Members) (Amendment) Bill came before the Seanad and Dáil. It provided for an expansion of the franchise for six Seanad seats beyond Trinity College and National University of Ireland graduates.
A small handful of senators opposed the legislation as it did not expand the franchise to everyone. Similarly, when it came to the Dáil, Sinn Féin, the Social Democrats and the Labour Party opposed the proposal for the same reason. But the government parties, along with a handful of Independent TDs, voted the Bill through. In the Seanad, so few senators showed up for the final debate that a vote couldn’t even be called and the Bill was simply passed.
Under the Supreme Court ruling in Heneghan v Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government, the Oireachtas had until the end of May 2025 to have a new system of elections for the Seanad in place and operational. The bare minimum required was an expansion of the right to vote for six seats to all degree-holders from higher education institutions in the State.
Between the local elections and the recent general election, there was a unique opportunity for people to put pressure on candidates to back full expansion of the Seanad franchise and to ask candidates, particularly those from Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil, why they thought it was right to base Seanad voting on whether someone holds a college degree or not.
Had the government’s legislation been delayed or rejected by a majority of members of the Oireachtas in October, the possibility was there for forcing the expansion of the vote to all as the clock ticked down to May 2025.
The question for those who continue to have no vote or voice in Seanad elections now is what did they do to advocate for that right when the perfect opportunity presented itself in October last year? Did they contact their local TDs and ask them to vote against the government’s limited proposal? Did they contact members of the Seanad to urge them to even simply show up for work in October and debate the government’s Bill?
I, for one, will continue to do all within my power to press for Seanad voting reform so that every citizen on this island, regardless of educational or socioeconomic background, will enjoy a right to vote in Seanad elections. But the sad reality is that the once in a lifetime opportunity the Supreme Court gave for true Seanad reform was squandered last year and very people even noticed. – Yours, etc,
TOMÁS HENEGHAN,
East Wall,
Dublin 3.
Sir, – Brendan Wright highlights what is clearly unfair and unjust about the Seanad election.
Writing to your paper on January 30th, 2002 , I said “it is a highly undemocratic way of electing members of a chamber that has an important role in our democracy”. I also went on to say “the idea that only university graduates should have a vote, when many of the PAYE workers who paid their taxes to subsidise their education are excluded, seems quite indefensible”.
My views firmly remain the same 23 years on. – Yours, etc,
ALICE LEAHY,
Director of Services,
Alice Leahy Trust,
Dublin 8.
Hoover, Ford and Carter
Sir, – A reader (Letters, January 2nd) points to an apparent error in your obituary for the late US president Jimmy Carter (December 29th). The apparent mistake, which he highlights, is to describe Jimmy Carter as the first US president since Herbert Hoover in 1932 “to lose a re-election bid” after a first term. He cites Gerald Ford’s defeat in 1976 to Jimmy Carter. On this analysis, this would make Jimmy Carter the second one-term president since Hoover. However, the obituary is correct. Gerald Ford did not fail in a re-election attempt in 1976. This is because he succeeded to the presidency in August 1974 not through an election, but as the vice-president who took office when incumbent Richard Nixon resigned after the cover-up of the Watergate burglary. Ford, therefore, did not seek re-election, but sought election for the first time in 1976 and lost to Jimmy Carter. – Yours, etc,
PAUL COOPER,
Liverpool
United Kingdom.
Politicians and public servants
Sir, – Labour Cllr Dermot Lacey’s concern (Letters, January 2nd) about the balance of power between elected representatives and paid staff, and its consequences, seems exactly right and I have heard it echoed by representatives of other parties.
Only politicians can fix this particular problem, yet during the recent election I saw no mention of meaningful public service reform in any party manifesto. Serious public service reform may be unattractive to politicians. It would be hellishly difficult and inevitably require short-term pain in return for long-term gain, something that our electoral cycle militates against. I also wonder, though, whether the current arrangement conveniently allows politicians, particularly at senior levels, to avoid accountability themselves? – Yours, etc,
SEAN RYAN,
Mountshannon,
Co Clare.
Harding’s pen picture
Sir, – With January 1st falling on a Wednesday, the day The Irish Times normally brings us Michael Harding, my new year could hardly have got off to a better start (“An old friend asked if I was ‘still at the writing’. ‘When I can get the ink,’ I said”, People, January 1st).
So, whether Michael brings us his precious brand of enlightenment “on the same old laptop” or with slopey writing in pen and ink, it will matter little as long as his compositions keep streaming our way. – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL GANNON,
Kilkenny.
Sir, – Michael Harding regrets his penmanship, lamenting the lack of ink in his fountain pen to revive a lost art.
It would be more concerning if his pencil had run out of lead! – Yours, etc,
ANNE MARIE KENNEDY,
Craughwell,
Co Galway.
Redefining success
Sir, – As I reflect on the beginning of a new year, I find myself exploring what the term success really means?
The message that many young people today hear about success is about having a college degree, a high-paying job, along with fancy materialistic items.
As one becomes older, one realises that success really is peace of mind, loving your work, enjoying your hobbies, staying healthy and strong, as well as having the freedom to choose. One also realises the importance of focusing on one’s mental health, along with making a positive impact on those around us. – Yours, etc,
JOHN O’BRIEN,
Clonmel,
Co Tipperary.
Schools struggle to find teachers
Sir, – Further to “Secondary schools struggle to fill hundreds of posts” (News, January 1st) and recent correspondence (Letters, January 2nd), we either give our newly qualified teachers roots, as in a full-time job, or we will continue to give them wings to fly abroad. – Yours, etc,
DAVID CURRAN,
Knocknacarra,
Galway.
Hasta la vista, baby
A chara,– Congratulations to The Irish Times on “The first babies of 2025″ report by Tim O’Brien (News, January 1st).
It’s the first time I’ve noticed a switch to reporting in kilogrammes the weight of the newborn babies. Does this indicate that our babies are now closer to Berlin than to Boston? – Is mise,
DERMOT O’ROURKE,
Lucan,
Co Dublin.