Letters to the Editor: AI Act offers opportunity for change
Close collaboration with all public and private sector stakeholders would be critical for the success of such a radical overhaul of government services.
Telecommunications are the foundational backbone for todayâs digital society, providing the essential infrastructure, connectivity, and services that enable digital activities for individuals, businesses, and governments.
Minister Patrick OâDonovanâs reported non-attendance at a recent European Telecommunications Council meeting begs the question: Is it best practice that such an important technology is overseen by a minister with very diverse responsibilities including arts, culture, communications, media, and sport?
The adoption of the forthcoming AI Act could be an opportunity to transfer responsibility for telecommunications to an independent minister of state dedicated to digital affairs who would report directly to the Taoiseach.
The mandate of the minister of state would cover all aspects of digital transformation (AI, digital public services, platforms, data, networks, skills, and cybersecurity) under the overarching title of âDigital Affairs and AI Sovereigntyâ.
It would be in line with emerging global best practice as countries worldwide grapple with the challenges of AI and their digital ecosystems.
Close collaboration with all public and private sector stakeholders would be critical for the success of such a radical overhaul of government services.
Most importantly, it would send a powerful message that digital transformation is no longer a niche policy area but has become a cross-cutting, societal issue which is vital for Irelandâs future sovereignty, security, wellbeing, equality, and prosperity.
Paraphrasing Henry Kissinger, our EU partners would also know who to contact when the inevitable cyber emergencies, which will mark our shared future, occur.
As an Irish citizen, I am appalled at the partisan and divisive rhetoric of our new President, Catherine Connolly, in her inauguration speech.
President Connolly hypocritically called for a vague and ill-defined ânew Republicâ immediately after making a public declaration in front of the Chief Justice that she would âmaintain the Constitution of Ireland and uphold its lawsâ.
Perhaps the President should also acquaint herself with Article 12(1) of the Bunreacht na hâĂireann, which stipulates that the President âshall exercise and perform the powers and functions conferred on the President by this Constitution and by lawâ.
The President has to represent all citizens, not just those who elected her, but President Connolly immediately went into campaigning mode, talking boastfully about her âpowerful mandateâ, and encroaching onto the political domain by asserting that âa home is a fundamental human rightâ, and by attacking her opponents who called her extreme views âtoo leftâ.
So much for bringing the country together!
She spoke critically of the âprevailing narrativeâ, and the âdominant narrativeâ, without explaining precisely what she means â one might assume that she means the prevailing market capitalist economic system that has made all Irish citizens better off, and furthermore has lifted hundreds of thousands of our fellow citizens out of poverty.
What was striking and particularly disturbing in her speech was the lack of generosity and outreach to our unionist brethren in Northern Ireland. Instead, with her blunt reference to Article 3 of the Constitution, President Connolly seemed to be emphasising that she will be very much a republican president, following the divisive pathway of her main political backer, Sinn FĂ©in.
Previous presidents have served to represent all the people, and have expanded the role of the office; it is very much to be regretted that on the worrying evidence of this first major speech by the President, it looks likely that rather than expand the role, she is very much likely to diminish and indeed degrade the sacred office of our head of State.
Porn, hardcore or otherwise, has been in our society for a long time, and there has to be a reason for this, and that reason, in my opinion, is because people want it. It is my understanding that if a society âbansâ an item, that the human psyche will crave it more, so by removing the publicâs wants we would only increase the peopleâs wishes to acquire it.
This could lead to an even âdarkerâ porn culture, as it would go âundergroundâ and become unregulated.
Personally, I struggle with the fact that parents and professionals, such as Richard Hogan, are aware of the dangers that are on smartphones, and it isnât just porn, yet they still allow a culture that give these devices to children that are too young to even form a sentence.
This is the issue, not porn. I think it is time enough that our society is made to take responsibility for the welfare of the children of Ireland. I am absolutely sick to death of Ireland blaming anything but themselves for the disgraceful way that we allow children to be treated.
This is the poison that Mr Hogan should be addressing, and nothing else.
However, while all eyes are on Cop30, on November 13, the European Parliament voted to effectively exempt 92% of in-scope companies from reporting requirements under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. The vote also included complete deletion of mandatory climate transition plans from the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive.
This is part of the European Commission president Ursula von der Leyenâs âsimplificationâ Omnibus package which pledges to reduce regulatory âred tapeâ and bolster European âcompetitivenessâ. It is indisputable that competitiveness is placed higher on the EUâs agenda than climate ambition.
However, the manner in which this vote was passed is of even greater concern. The centre-right EPP abandoned its centrist allies and voted in concert with the right-wing patriots, Europe of Sovereign Nations, Conservatives and Reformists to pass this deregulation package.
Rather than raising Europeâs global standard-setting role, it appears the EPP is facilitating a far-right voice on deregulation. With von der Leyen herself being a member of the EPP, this sets a concerning precedent for lawmaking during the rest of her mandate.
Yes, European competitiveness in the new transactional world order is required, but this should not be at the cost of European values.
Just seven months ago, Manfred Weber (EPP chairman) said: âWe will never work together with those who are not respecting my three pros: pro Ukraine, pro rule of law and pro Europe, these are fundamental things.â
However, the EPPâs red lines seem to have faded, with the climate being its ultimate victim.
newspaper a number of years ago about a major study of pension fund management.
The findings were that over the life of the fund, between 30% and 40% of the growth in the fund does not accrue to the pensioner, but is taken out in administration, fees, and commission charges.
It found that while it might be expected that the first yearâs contributions would make the greatest contribution to the pension pot, this was not the case, as they were paid out in commissions.
It also found that in years when there was above-par growth of the funds, this did not accrue to the pension pot, and was used to pay out bonuses etc instead of being retained to offset years when growth was below par.
Now that employees are being forced into pension schemes, what assurances can the State and pension funds provide that funds are managed in the best interests of employees?
