In recent weeks, both the US and Europe have been hit with extreme weather which has wrought havoc and destruction in communities in both regions. Everywhere people are having to react to what were once thought rare occurrences, but are now the new normal.
Decades of inaction by governments, in the face of intense lobbying by fossil fuel companies, and the recent rise in populist climate denial-laden politics, have meant that much of the early momentum that led to the Paris Accord has been wasted. Instead of prevention, we are now in mitigation mode, and it is becoming increasingly apparent that we are far from prepared for what is coming.
However, this is no longer just about extreme weather. A recent UK government report â Nature Security Assessment on Global Diversity Loss, Ecosystem Collapse and National Security â was published on January 20 to little fanfare, and even the UK government quietly moved on from it. The conclusions of the report are stark.Â
It highlights that global biodiversity loss, and ecosystem collapse, pose significant risks to international security, and identifies that healthy ecosystems underpin food security, water availability, economic stability, public health, and social cohesion. As ecosystems degrade, these foundations weaken, significantly increasing the probability of humanitarian crises and conflict. These will quickly cascade across borders, driving mass migration.
The report also acknowledges that consumption-driven growth is a key driver of this crisis. This week, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres warned that the global economy needed to move away urgently from GDP and its rewarding of pollution and ecological destruction. The change needed to turn this around would require a total volte face from the current paradigm of billionaire aggrandisement, an anathema to our tech bros.Â
However, without radical change now, we face increasing uncertainty as to whether civil society in its current form will survive in our lifetimes.
Barry Walsh, Blackrock, Cork
Are An Post using monopoly profits?
John Hearnâs letter â âAn Post financesâ â is one of the best letters to a newspaper Iâve ever read.Â
He eloquently hypothesises that An Post is making big profits on domestic letters and may be using this to subsidise other, unidentified, loss-making activities. This is exactly the claim that Irish courier companies are also making, and had included the now-bust Fastway Couriers. Using monopoly profits to subsidise loss-making businesses in unregulated markets is simply not on. The question strikes me as An Post pensioners are being denied their agreed pension increases â who will actually investigate this?
Eoin McGettigan, via email
Irelandâs system exposed in Paris
Irelandâs Six Nations rugby defeat in Paris felt less like a collapse than an accumulation. Many of the issues exposed by France were not new, merely revisited: predictable attacking shapes, an overworked kicking game that surrendered momentum, and a defensive system that struggled once broken play took hold.
Selection decisions sharpened those problems. The continued faith in Sam Prendergast at 10 again exposed the gap between promise and Test-level resilience. The decision to opt for a six-two bench appeared to prioritise the validation of that selection over adaptability on the night. It effectively left Ireland unable to alter course at 10 once the contestâs direction became clear. Against a side as athletic and tactically alert as France, that rigidity was ruthlessly punished.
More broadly, Irelandâs tactical identity now seems increasingly indistinguishable from Leinsterâs â or perhaps Leinster has become a reflection of Ireland. The cohesion this brings is obvious; so too is the downside. When that shared system is disrupted, both sides falter in strikingly similar ways. France identified those stress points early, and returned to them repeatedly.
France adapted. Ireland persisted. At Test level, that distinction explains the result.
Diarmuid OâCinneide, Garryowen, Limerick
Counting kings
Colin Sheridan states that a century ago, more than 100 monarchies existed worldwide. Now it is 43 â âAround the world, crown cracks from weight of royal rumbleâ (Irish Examiner, February 7).
It brings to mind the statement made by the late King Farouk of Egypt in 1950, that by the end of the 20th century there would be only five kings left in the world â the kings of spades, hearts, diamonds, clubs, and England. He might be a little out, time-wise, but he had the right idea.
Edward Lynch, Lismore, Co Waterford
AontĂș are having an impact in Ireland
I read with interest Mick Cliffordâs column on small parties. He wrote: âThe only distinguishing policy feature with AontĂș is its stance on abortion and other life issues.â I am glad to say there are many points of differentiation between AontĂș and the establishment parties.
AontĂș came within a hairâs breadth of helping to get Maria Steen across the line as a candidate in the presidential election. We were the only party to warn as to the burgeoning dissatisfaction with the political system that led to a record spoiled vote of more than 13% in the presidential election. We were the only party to table legislation to fix the presidential election democratic deficit.
Yes, we are the only party that supports the right to life of everyone in society. We were the only party to call a vote against the People Before Profit-Solidarity
motion to reintroduce a bill to decriminalise abortion up until birth, a vote we won in the DĂĄil by two votes.
Our policy is born out of the republican human rights ethos of the party. We have never once argued this issue on the basis of religion.
We were the only party to consistently push back on the governmentâs chaotic immigration policy. So much so that Mr Clifford singled us out for harsh, and I would say, inaccurate treatment on that issue during the election â a point he seems to have forgotten now.
Up until very recently, no other political party but AontĂș focused on the fact that the delivery of infrastructure is drowning in a sea of red tape and bureaucracy. Indeed, every other opposition party made a virtue of adding more regulation.
On spatial development, we have railed against the Dublin-centric development of the country. Indeed, we have held protests in numerous locations on the congestion and the tolls that are creating a commuter hell for so many people.
.On Irish unity, we have a far more practical and incrementalist approach than Sinn FĂ©in.
Irelandâs politics has changed in the last two years. FF, FG, and SF have flipped on a range of different issues recently, in large part because we are winning the arguments and taking their votes.
Indeed, one of the editors of the book, How Ireland Voted 2024, Eoin OâMalley stated recently that AontĂș is the only party that can be credibly called a centrist party at the moment.
People have recognised this. We had the highest increase in votes of any party in the general election in 2024 when 100,000 people voted for AontĂș.
Indeed, all polling companies show us on an upward trajectory; polling as high as 6% in Ireland Thinks and RedC polls recently. We have 60 functioning Cumann and 12 elected reps, at council, DĂĄil, and Seanad level. Our membership is at a record high, and other elected reps are joining us.
Not only have we significantly grown, but we are having an impact far beyond our size.
Peadar TĂłibĂn TD, AontĂș
