Even if he delays calling a new Assembly election, the new Northern Ireland secretary of state will still be unable to prevent it from future crises resulting in the intermittent collapses of the Assembly institutions including the power-sharing executive itself.
The core problem that caused its instability emanated from the St Andrews agreement when the method of electing the executive was changed — following which the executive has been led jointly by a first minister from Northern Ireland’s largest designated unionist political party and a deputy first minister from its largest designated nationalist party. The first executive appointed under this new arrangement was led jointly by Ian Paisley and Martin Mc Guinness. This pattern continued thereafter with DUP nominees for first minister and Sinn Féin nominees for deputy first minister until the recent election in May this year. Following it, Sinn Féin are now entitled to hold the post of first minister and DUP are entitled to hold the post of deputy first minister.
This carve-up of political power between the two largest parties on both sides of the traditional divide had an inherent weakness. Instead of encouraging them to work together in the common interest of Northern Ireland and its people, it provided each of them with a political “veto” which they both have regrettably used to prevent the Assembly functioning for their own political objectives — Sinn Féin used this power because of the lack of progress on an Irish Language Act and the DUP are currently using it to seek the removal of the Northern Ireland Protocol.
The procedure for electing the executive under the St Andrews agreement needs to be amended now to ensure the election of an executive to prevent further collapses of the Assembly and its institutions in the future.
The British and Irish governments should urgently initiate discussions with all Northern Ireland’s political parties to consider a new method of electing the current executive and all future executives. If another Assembly election is called in October, it will simply result in increased seats for Sinn Féin and the DUP at the expense of the SDLP and Ulster Unionists respectively and future crises will arise.
One suggestion I would offer to ensure the full functioning of the Assembly is that the British and Irish governments should agree to amending the St Andrews agreement by adding a “default mechanism” to be implemented in event of either of the two main parties preventing the power-sharing assembly from discharging its powers. In such a scenario, the British government should invite all parties to engage in negotiations with one another to form a voluntary coalition government which will command a majority in the Assembly and meet the requirement of fulfilling the criteria of having sufficient cross community support to the satisfaction of both the British and Irish governments. Those parties that prefer not to be part of the coalition government could then serve as the official opposition.
I believe the introduction of such a change would guarantee political stability and the formation of future power-sharing executives in accordance with the Good Friday agreement.
John Cushnahan
Former leader of the Alliance Party
and former Fine Gael MEP
We need to take childcare seriously
Can we please begin to take childcare seriously in this country? We are talking about the care, education — yes, education — and development of our children in their crucial, formative early years.
The root of the problem is a combination of a lack of vision/laissez-faire attitude by the state to the sector and perennial, chronic underfunding. The internationally recommended investment for childcare is 1% of GDP. In Ireland, we have historically spent around 0.2% of GDP on childcare. This has increased to 0.37% recently.
There are three categories of people who have suffered as a result of this dismal policy failure by the State.
First, parents, who have to pay among the highest childcare costs in the world, to the extent that some cannot afford to have a second child and/or give up their jobs. Parents rightly describe childcare costs as being a second mortgage. Sometimes it costs even more than a mortgage. Second, the children, some of whom will have to forgo the joy of having a little brother or sister, because their parents cannot afford to have another child, or forgo the likes of holidays or lessons, because of the financial burden of childcare costs. Third, the childcare workers, who in my experience do amazing, often educational, work with smiles on their faces in very trying circumstances, for poor pay. You could also add in grandparents, who in their golden years, often find themselves having to take up the reins of parenting once again, because their sons and daughters cannot afford the prohibitive childcare costs.
When you look at our changing demographics, in particular our ageing population, does it really make sense to financially discourage people from having children?
I have spoken to family, friends and colleagues from Poland, Italy, Belgium, and Germany, who are shocked at the cost of childcare in Ireland.
There are indications that changes are afoot but tweaks to the current system will not be enough. It is high time for Ireland, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, to step up to the plate on this very important issue.
When it comes to childcare, Ireland is no country for young families.
Rob Sadlier
Rathfarnham
Dublin 16
Landlords reaping tax break benefits
A campaign of lies and misrepresentations is underway in an effort to divert resources from the most vulnerable (eg, homeless, social welfare recipients, low waged) to landlords who would like to have more money.
This includes the pretence that landlords are selling up because taxes are too high (ie, the same as PAYE); or the “exorbitant” €40 a year to the Residential Tenancies Board when rents are higher than they have ever been; or that landlords who don’t have surplus cash after paying a mortgage are not making a profit, when they are actually making significant profit in the form of equity in their asset(s); or because the requirement to provide basic humane living conditions is too onerous, etc.
The reality is much simpler. Accidental landlords and the vast number of small ‘Celtic tiger’ landlords are the product of the equally dysfunctional boom and crash. Landlords are selling for the very simple reason that property prices in Ireland have never been so high and concerns that there will be another crash. This means there has never been, and probably never will be, a more lucrative time to sell.
New small landlords are not investing mostly because it was a Celtic tiger aberration in the first place and partly because only those driven by the desperate need for a place to live would pay these prices.
Crucially, the doomsday forecast if more landlords leave is nonsense. Unless they pack up their properties and take them with them, it doesn’t have an adverse effect on the number of homes available to individuals and families. In any case, private rentals are only ever appropriate for transient accommodation needs and never for family homes or forever homes for individuals.
Our society needs everyone, including small landlords and institutional investors, to pay their fair share of tax and for the state to build and to keep on building adequate numbers of social housing. Anything else is, at best, a smokescreen.
Patricia McNamara
Dublin
TDs pay could rise by up to €6,500
A new public sector pay deal could see TD’s pay rise by €6,500 with a lump sum of more than €2,000; most of their salaries are already over a hundred thousand per year. Most of the ordinary working people’s salary isn’t anywhere near this and Micheál Martin is talking about tightening our belts. I wonder if any TDs will refuse these pay rises in solidarity with the people who are already suffering. Mr Martin and the rest of the TDs won’t be suffering in this cost of living crisis. I really doubt if any of them really care.
Leona Campbell
Dundalk
Co Louth
Nato only want to defeat Russia
Taoiseach Micheál Martin has expressed his heartfelt concern about the “needless killing of young people on all sides” in the Russia–Ukraine war (‘ Taoiseach to Putin: Stop the “needless killing of young people” ’ (Irish Examiner, online, September 21). However, Mr Martin’s call for Russia to unilaterally declare a ceasefire is unrealistic. Nato has made the very same demand since Russia invaded, even while pouring weapons into Ukraine to sustain Ukraine’s war effort. Clearly, Nato is not genuinely seeking a ceasefire. Rather, it seeks to defeat Russia, no matter the cost in Ukrainian lives or the risk of nuclear war.
On the face of it, Mr Martin is somewhat at odds with Nato judging by his remark that Russia “‘needs to realise’ that there is now no alternative other than a diplomacy-based resolution”. In that case, he must differentiate himself from Nato by calling for both sides to lay down their arms in advance of a negotiated settlement. Otherwise, one must conclude that Mr Martin is led by Nato, regardless of what he says.
Dominic Carroll
Ardfield
Co Cork
Moscow job for Micheál Martin
I have just listened to Micheál Martin’s excellent speech at the UN. It’s particularly noteworthy here in Canada given the fact that Ireland won a seat on the UN Security Council ahead of Canada.
I believe that Mr Martin would make an excellent Irish ambassador to Russia when his term as Taoiseach comes to an end in December.
Gerard Walsh
Canada
