A letter to the Daily Telegraph which was published on 29th January 2000.
The examples Professor Martin gives of politicians from the Empire being elected to the House of Commons are not really relevant to the present government’s Bill to allow members of the Irish Parliament to sit in the House of Commons (letter, Jan. 28th).
First, the Empire politicians were actually supporters of the British connection and freely took the path of alligiance to the Crown. Secondly, they mostly were not members of Empire legislatures and the House of Commons at the same time.
This Government’s Disqualifications Bill aims to treat people who, far from having allegiance to the Crown, are among its bitterest enemies. They are citizens of a foreign republic born in arms against this country. Moreover, under the Bill they will be enabled to sit in the Irish Republic’s parliament, taking its oath, at the same time as they sit in that of the United Kingdom.
This Bill degrades the Crown, British sovereignty and British self-respect. Only a hypocrite could take both oaths involved: only a fundamentally anti-British government could propose that they should.
A letter to the Editor of the Daily Telegraph which was published on 9th May 1997.
The announcement that a dedicated proponent of abolishing the pound sterling, Sir David Simon, is to be succeeded in his job as chairman of British Petroleum by Peter Sutherland – an Irishman, previously an EU commissioner (City Comment, May 8), brings into question the extent to which certain corporate businessmen are using their business positions to advance personal political objectives.
In the absence of any convincing economic or business arguments in favour of abolishing the pound, but with many against, nobody can seriously deny that the issue is overwhelmingly a political one – namely our continued existence as a self-governing country.
That being so the Confederation of British Industry – headed by another Irish citizen Niall Fitzgerald also chairman of Unilever, a predominantly British company – might wish to consider whether it and its member companies wish to be identified with a political viewpoint which, as shown in poll after poll, is overwhelmingly opposed by the British people.
That the Republic of Ireland is a supporter of this viewpoint is understandable, given the continued prominence in our affairs of certain of its citizens and the fact that Ireland receives around £2,000 per annum per family from the EU, about £400 of which comes from British families. However these are not reasons, one would have thought, which grass roots members of the CBI support.
A letter to the Daily Telegraph which was published on 27th October 1994.
Anne Applebaum (article, Oct. 25th) is right to point out that, unlike the Palestinians, the Catholic Irish do have their own state, but she is wrong to say that the fight in Northern Ireland is over a “resource-free tract of land”.
On the contrary, by hard work and dedication over the centuries, the Protestant people have created the network of efficient well tended farms which has so distinguished Northern Ireland from the Republic of Ireland. In addition, the Unionist population has made contributions to British technology, and to the British Army out of all proportion to its numbers.
Despite the mayhem and economic sabotage systematically carried out by the IRA, northern Ireland continues to deliver the best secondary school results and to have one of the most skilled and willing industrial workforces in the whole of the United Kingdom, as I have direct reason to know.
For a government to say, as this one does, that it is neutral about whether such citizens go or stay is a shameful disgrace. Perhaps it cares more about mineral rights. If the Republic of Ireland finally manages to get its hands on Northern Ireland, it would also obtain rights to around 1,700 square miles of the Continental shelf.
