2 April 1998 Edition

Resize: A A A Print

Mála Poist

Millennium bug



A chairde,

The general public is being told that colossal amounts of money will have to be spent on re-adjusting computers to cope with the change to the year 2000.

With all the talk of the potential for artifical intelligence, not to speak of the great creativity of those who design and programme computers it does seem strange that a simple re-adjustment of some sort cannot be made to do the job required. We have a great deal of talk of competitiveness, the need to make workers redundant, to cut benefits of all sorts or make people jump through hoops in order to get them. There are also such problems as homelessness, a need for greater spending on schools and hospitals, as well as a need to staff them, particularly for those in this society who are getting a very raw deal indeed.

Yet despite all this it is apparently of overwhelming importance to spend enormous sums of money on changing a few figures on a machine. There is no need to ask who will profit from this particular ajustment. Will it benifit the poorer or weaker population in this country or elsewhere in the third world, where, for example, countries such as Indonesia have just been thrown into bankruptsy?

But who are we to challenge the logic of the market-place?

Peter Moore

Dublin 2

Bank robbers



A chairde,

The only surprise about the revelations of scandals in the NIB was the surprise of so many politicians and media pundits. Most intelligent people realise that the super-profits of the banks had to come from somewhere.

The greedy practices of big business in general has been encouraged by successive governments who, while restricting workers' wages, have enabled rampant profiteering by lowering Corporation Tax and Capital Gains Tax and removing the Bank Levy altogether. They have also failed to set up a State or Community Banking System to provide real competition to the cosy cartels that dominate the financial system.

Sean Marlow,
Dublin 11

Further sellouts



A chairde,

The boundary clause which was to save the unity of Ireland was sold out by Cosgrave and his colleagues in secret in 1925. Craig asked Churchill for the removal of that clause. Churchill, for once, was honest. He replied that the House had no power whatever to alter the Treaty, that he had to discuss it with Collins. All knew that Collins and Griffith would not agree, so they were conveniently got rid of. When they were gone, Craig got his wish.

By removing the boundary clause, Cosgrave did what Churchill had not the power to do, ie destroy the Treaty. This was done, against the wishes of the people of Ireland, and the treason was committed in secret, behind closed doors. The action should be declared retrospectively illegal, and the essential boundary clause at once restored to the Treaty.

Cosgrave also agreed to the paying of annuities to Britian, to pay Britain for having robbed and slaughtered us. No Irish government had the grit to demand the annuities back again. The full sum of the annuities paid by the Irish serfs to the wealthy British ought to be demanded back in an international court.

Let us hope that we get an Irish parliament in Dublin, instead of a puppet government yielding all advantage, on all fronts, to the robbers and supplanters. For good measure, we could find out what they are really up to, behind the closed doors, while they are distracting our attention, wasting the nation's time and money on the baiting of Mr Haughey. This is a smokescreen to cover up some nefarious sellouts being done in the background.

Máire
London

Unilateral change



A chairde,

The latest poll shows that, while unilateral change in Articles 2 and 3 would be unacceptable, ``balanced constitutional change'' coupled with reform of the RUC might be accepted. But are any of these on the table?

The New Ireland Forum agreed that a united Ireland was the best option for all the people of this country. Now a united Ireland is not even under consideration, nor is a federal Ireland or a confederation between north and south. Even joint authority and joint sovereignty have been ruled out. All that is being offered is 100% British rule of the north without any balancing claim by the Irish constitution, even though those who consider themselves Irish are in a majority in large areas of the north. Doesn't sound much like ``balanced constitutional change'' to me.

On the RUC, the latest data from the Fair Employment Commission and the RUC itself show that unionist domination of the RUC and discrimination against the few Catholics in the force are as bad as ever. The latest revelations about the killings of Seamus Ludlow and more general collusion with loyalist death squads show why a majority of northern nationalists want a total disbandment of the RUC.

Thomas Peavoy
Dublin

An Phoblacht
44 Parnell Sq.
Dublin 1
Ireland