Madam, – Dermot Desmond has obviously put more than a little time and effort into addressing the failures and shortcomings of our political institutions and systems of governance (Opinion, February 12th). It would now be appreciated if he re-focused his obvious talents and let us know how to deal with rogue banks, the recalcitrant behaviour of senior bankers, the incompetence of senior executives within financial institutions, and of course the whole question of bankers’ bonuses. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – I am surprised at your decision to give a banner headline, Front-page coverage and almost full page inside to Dermot Desmond's proposals for governmental reform (February 12th). All this on a day during the election when the paper had space only for summaries of significant policy statements by three of the contesting parties. Mr Desmond's attainments in business are to be acknowledged, but his authority in this area is no greater than that of the ordinary man in the street and the opinions of a man in the street are not often found astride the columns of The Irish Times.
Sadly Mr Desmond’s proposals do not deal with two related areas in which he might be able to offer relevant expertise, especially as his proposals feature a strong emphasis on transparency. How do we ensure that people of wealth and power are prevented from exercising undue influence on government ministers (and newspaper editors)? And how do we prevent such persons from intimidating the media with defamation writs and inhibiting the work of tribunals and inquiries by vexatious appeals to the courts? – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Dermot Desmond’s radical political reform proposal (Opinion, February 12th) aspires to change “. . .the pervasive culture of secrecy at the heart of politics in Ireland”. Where do these secretive tendencies come from if not from the many years of power and influence exercised by the institutional Catholic Church in civic affairs and in education? The church has been the very model of non-accountability, lack of transparency, and authoritarian decision-making. The nation’s governance has continued to operate in a righteously anti-democratic mode, a virtual theocracy rife with paternalism, contempt for people and their intelligence, inner circles where irrationality reigns, and a corrupting love of power and its trappings.
If the people of Egypt are ready to try a more democratic and secular form of government, is it not time to give it a go in Ireland? – Yours, etc,
Madam, – I wonder if we implemented all that Dermot Desmond advises us, would he consider Ireland the perfect place to live? – Yours, etc,
Madam, – I find it infuriating that you give the likes of Dermot Desmond so much paper space to express his opinions on what changes should be brought in by the next government when he is not even tax-resident here. If he were a true patriot and really cared about Ireland he would pay his tax here. By not doing so he loses all credibility. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Dermot Desmond has provided a road map for political reform that “puts Ireland first”. One suggestion is that non-parliamentarians should be allowed to become ministers. After donating his ideas to the State, could we ask him to extend that selflessness and serve as a minister? I understand if Mr Desmond may wish to limit such service to the Department of Foreign Affairs.
There are other ways in which Mr Desmond could put Ireland first. He could repatriate himself and his wealth. He could agree to surrender a good proportion of that wealth in recognition of taxes forgone by the country he is now attempting to help. He could convince other expatriates to do the same. Until such time as he is prepared to do this, I would prefer if he kept his opinions to himself. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – The edited extract of Dermot Desmond’s document on political reform in Ireland (Opinion, February 12th) contains many ideas with which I can readily agree and the document seems to bring together many proposals and suggestions that have been made by various persons over many years, but which have not yet been adopted or, at least, implemented. Two sentences in particular struck me: “This [the manner in which the Government conducts its business] will be accompanied by an overarching change in the pervasive culture of secrecy at the heart of politics in Ireland”; and “The basic problem at the heart of politics in Ireland is an opaque approach to conducting businesss”.
Is it reasonable to presume that this is intended to refer to or, at least, include “behind the scenes” support, financial or otherwise, and involvement by individuals and companies with politicians,political parties, public figures such as former bankers, and dealings with State-owned assets and licences? Obviously transparency in such matters would be very welcome and indeed one could speculate, that if practised in the past, would have obviated the need for many of the tribunals and government investigations and inquiries over the past 20 years with a consequential saving of time, effort and cost.
On reading the article I checked a map to see if Gibraltar was on the road to Damascus and noted with interest that, indeed, it could be, but it would depend from where one started the journey. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – In Egypt we have just seen the overthrow of a dictator and hopefully in due course will see a democratically-elected government.
In Ireland, however, we see proposals from the likes of Dermot Desmond seeking to reduce the accountability of government to the people by having un-elected people becoming government ministers and presumably taking “the right decisions” that are “good for the people” but perhaps decisions that the people don’t want – which would be undemocratic. From the Greens we see proposals for a more distanced democracy via a list system, making it more difficult to get rid of people high on a list that a party rather than the people dictate.
We should be careful about over-reacting and taking extreme measures and diluting our democracy in these difficult times. We would be better to remove the failed politicians (such as the Greens) and electing people who will serve us better. If Dermot Desmond thinks he is one of them, then let him face the people. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Churchill once said, “Headmasters have powers at their disposal with which prime ministers and presidents have never yet been invested”.
In other words they do not have to answer to a troublesome parliament. The essence of democracy is that of debate and debate involves arguments and arguments often delay decision-making. Dermot Desmond’s proposals for political reform (Opinion, February 12th) have all the hallmark of a successful businessman; he wants swift decision-making and a “no-nonsense” approach to government.
However, by insisting that cabinet ministers resign their Dáil seats he divorces the executive from the legislature. This is undemocratic. A cabinet should always be answerable to parliament for the decisions that it takes.
Of course, there are merits in some of Mr Desmond’s proposals for reform, but there are dangers too in ditching vital checks on the powers of the executive; dangers which if ignored can lead to authoritarian government. – Yours, etc,