Sir, – Today (October 2nd) is World Farmed Animals Day, an opportune time to ask how the annual slaughter of 82 billion farmed animals can be justified.
A little more than a half-century ago, meat was considered a luxury. All that changed with the advent of intensive farming, which began its journey of growth and expansion after the second World War, when it was discovered that chickens could be raised successfully indoors.
Fast-forward to 2025 and the situation is unrecognisable from the animal agriculture landscape of the 1970s, with over 80 billion land animals raised and slaughtered annually, the majority of these on factory farms, where they never see the light of day, never feel the sun on their backs, their brief, confined lives ending in the cauldron of the slaughterhouse.
These days, when animal agriculture comes under the spotlight, it is invariably on account of its devastatingly adverse effect on the climate.
READ MORE
Rarely do we hear about the lives and deaths of the animals, who are at the heart of these massive industries.
Our World in Data estimates that 900,000 cows, 1.4 million goats, 1.7 million sheep, 3.8 million pigs, 12 million ducks, and 202 million chickens were slaughtered every day in 2023.
These are nothing short of mind-boggling numbers, yet every one of the 82 billion animals are individuals, with their own unique DNA, their own personality, their own ability to experience a wide range of emotions. Ask anyone who has spent time on a farm animal sanctuary and they will tell you the same thing: that every animal they take in will start to express their own personality as soon as their recovery allows it.
Unfortunately for the animals raised indoors on factory farms, the massive numbers ensure that the individual animal will never be seen or heard.
It is up to governments to show a hitherto reluctant determination to push back against an animal agriculture lobby that is powerful, inflexible and wedded to growth.
There is no more room for growth in what is already an out-of-control industry; there is, instead, an urgent need to reduce the numbers of animals raised and killed every year. – Yours, etc ,
GERRY BOLAND,
Carrick-on-Shannon,
Co Leitrim.
Steen and McDowell
Sir, – Michael McDowell writes: “I did not consider that a face-to-face meeting with Steen would serve any useful purpose, as her Seanad supporters well knew my position” (“Why I didn’t nominate Maria Steen for the presidency,” October 1st).
Given the amount of flak he has taken on this matter it would seem that such a face-to-face meeting, on the contrary, would have served a very useful purpose. – Yours, etc,
TOM McELLIGOTT,
Listowel,
Co Kerry.
Sir, – Michael McDowell’s account of the presidential nomination process and Maria Steen reads like spin. While positioned as a liberal stand, this was a strategic move to block a candidate he openly admitted he feared could win.
This is the opposite of support for democratic choice. This was about controlling the outcome.
But, if Steen really had a chance of winning, would this not have represented the will of the people? Remind me again, what are politicians supposed to represent?
For the record, I am not religious, I am pro-choice and I am undecided on who to vote for but disappointed that popular candidates, not just Steen, didn’t make the ballot. – Yours, etc,
DARA O’DONNELL,
Portobello,
Dublin 8.
Sir, – Perhaps the most interesting part of Michael McDowell’s article comes at the very end, when he tells us that Maria Steen might well have won the election.
One wonders if this comment reflects his opinion on the calibre of the three candidates now in the race or does it mean that he fears that Irish public opinion is moving away from liberalism?
Without Steen on the ballot paper, we can only speculate. – Yours, etc,
MARTIN McDONALD,
Terenure,
Dublin 12.
Peace plan for Gaza
Sir, – I find it impossible to comprehend the extraordinary rush to support the plan for Gaza paraded in Washington on Monday.
The plan represents the imposition of a range of conditions – by the US, Israel and a range of international actors – on the citizens of Gaza.
Moreover, the proposal makes no mention of the continuing military occupation of the West Bank by Israel or the creation of viable polity in which Palestinians are full participants.
I was recently privileged to visit a number of areas in the occupied West Bank where I met a range of citizens, NGOs and human rights advocates.
In each instance what was obvious was their profound understanding of the context of the genocide in Gaza and the military occupation of their land by Israel, and their willingness to embrace a just resolution.
In looking forward, a common thread emerged whereby most of the people I met largely rejected a two state solution in favour of a single multi-religious, multi-ethnic state encompassing the whole of historic Palestine. While I cannot assert that this would be the majority view of Palestinian citizens, it is surely self-evident that Palestinian representatives must be involved centrally, from the outset, in all consideration of their future.
While it is of course welcome that the US plan would pause the unlawful killing of Palestinians and the further destruction of Gaza, and facilitate the release of hostages, the context in which the plan has been prepared and presented is a clear manifestation of imperialist thinking and overreach.
It is hard not to conclude that the plan is the latest cynical tactic to consolidate Israel’s continuing control of Palestine and the lives of the Palestinian people.
It seems reasonable to suggest that the large majority of Palestinians, in the first instance, would want an immediate ceasefire and an end to the military occupation of Palestinian land in accordance with 1947 boundaries. Beyond that, it is first and foremost a matter for the Palestinian people to determine how and with whom their future should be envisioned. – Yours, etc,
CON LYNCH,
Schull,
West Cork.
Sir, – US president Donald Trump has warned of a “very sad end” if Hamas does not accept the Gaza peace plan. Unfortunately, a sad and heart-breaking end was reached months ago. – Yours, etc,
KEVIN McLOUGHLIN,
Ballina,
Co Mayo.
Army dreamers
Sir, – Well done to Pete Hegseth for calling out the inadequacies in the US military.
The commander-in-chief is approaching 80 years of age, overweight, wears make-up and avoided going to fight in Vietnam, while his second in command, the vice-president, is a “beardo”. – Yours, etc,
JOHN KELLY,
Bennekerry,
Carlow.
Sir, – Apropos of this disquieting article on US defence secretary’s Peter Hegseth’s “declaration of war” on portly generals, one wonders if Hegseth had also in mind the commander in chief? – Yours, etc,
IAN THOMPSON,
Lélex,
France.
Counting the cost
Sir, – I feel deeply for Joe McMinn (Letters, October 1st) when he laments the cost of Irish hotels as compared to Spain.
Perhaps he would prefer to be in Spain, earning a lower salary there and lamenting the prohibitive cost of holidays in northern Europe? – Yours, etc,
BLÁTHNAID DEENY,
Stranorlar,
Co Donegal.
Ryder Cup apology
Sir, – Tom Watson’s apology for the very unsavoury behaviour of the American fans at the Ryder Cup over the weekend is very welcome.
I think that it would have been far more effective and appropriate if he had spoken out loudly and clearly on Friday, Saturday or even belatedly on Sunday to the same fans while the matches were in play.
A timely intervention by him and other leading American voices could have spared Rory McIlroy, Shane Lowry and others a great deal of antagonism, venom and humiliation at the hands of those very boorish and unsporting fans. – Yours, etc,
DÁITHÍ Ó HAODHA,
Duagh,
Co Kerry.
Sir, – A reader likens the behaviour of US Ryder Cup fans to the behaviour of Millwall fans “ in the last century, albeit without the violence” (Letters, September 30th).
Having attended two Millwall matches in the past year I think it only fair to Millwall FC and their supporters to note how family friendly the Millwall matchday experience has become.
Credit where credit is due. – Yours, etc,
MAURICE SHEEHAN,
Rathgar,
Dublin 6.
Basic income for the arts
Sir, – Earlier this year, your editorial called for the retention and extension of Basic Income for the Arts (BIA).
The case is strengthened by the latest report on the pilot scheme, published last week. This cost benefit analysis showed that “for every €1 of public money invested in the pilot, society received €1.39 in return”.
It follows four other reports that detailed the hugely positive impact of BIA payments on the lives of recipients and their families.
As your editorial pointed out, retention and extension of the BIA was endorsed by all parties in the general election and by Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil in particular. But how it will be retained and extended in the budget, if at all, is still unclear.
Basic Income Ireland’s interest in the BIA pilot has always been primarily as a step towards the implementation of a universal basic income for everyone living in Ireland.
As such, our support for BIA has been based on the situation of arts workers as precarious workers with low, irregular and insecure incomes, who nevertheless do very valuable work that benefits Ireland both economically and culturally.
The research reports demonstrate the depth and extent of that precarity and insecurity.
We therefore endorse the retention of BIA and its extension to all arts workers, by continuing to support the initial cohort of recipients, while extending the payment to a much larger group. We also call for the BIA to be a permanent payment that goes to all arts workers throughout their careers.
In any basic income scheme, a common question is why income support should be provided to people on higher incomes.
Throughout the global basic income movement, the answer has always had two complementary responses. The first is that the personal situations of individuals are always liable to change.
They may have good incomes now, but they may face periods of low income during which they need income support, due to loss of employment, personal crises, illness, care responsibilities, and so on.
The second response is that a properly constructed basic income scheme ensures that high-income individuals always pay more in tax than they receive in basic income.
In other words, the basic income payment is targeted at the people who need it most by means of taxation, rather than traditional means-testing.
In effect, the extra tax paid by high-income recipients recoups the value of basic income from these individuals and contributes to the payments received by others.
The case for targeting through taxation rather than means-testing is particularly strong in relation to people with insecure incomes, such as most arts workers.
Means-testing relies on past incomes, which for such workers are not a guide to current incomes.
By contrast, tax reflects the incomes that people actually receive concurrently with their basic incomes. It is collected either on an ongoing basis, for people in the PAYE system, or annually in arrears f or people who are registered as self-employed.
It would therefore be completely consistent with the point of BIA for it to be accompanied by a surtax on the incomes of its higher income recipients. Such a charge would both target the payment to those who need it most and reduce the net fiscal cost of the BIA. – Yours, etc,
JOHN BAKER,
Joint Co-ordinator,
Basic Income Ireland,
c/o Comhlámh,
Dublin 2.
Storm warning
Sir, – Caroline O’Doherty’s report (September 30th) about Ireland “failing to prepare” for the next big storm might be retitled in the light of Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment and Minister for Transport Darragh O’Brien’s action to lift the passenger cap at Dublin Airport.
Let’s be proactive and say “Ireland succeeding in preparation for more powerful storms”. – Yours, etc,
Dr KEN BOYLE,
Sustainable Education Lead,
Grangegorman,
Technological University Dublin.
More Tramore memories
Sir, – Denis McClean’s An Irishman’s Diary (September 30th), brought back the memories of my teenage years in Tramore, Co Waterford, particularly the summer of 1968.
My parents bought my brother and I a weekly bus ticket to take us from Waterford city to the seaside.
Our gang of boys and girls would walk from the bus station, up the steep Gallweys hill, along the Doneraile walk, with its magnificent views of the bay, until we arrived at the Pier.
The Pier was a natural open-air swimming pool where many of us learned to swim. Afterwards we went to Cunningham’s fish and chip shop, on Main Street, followed by a walk to “down around” where Freddie’s juke box waited for us.
The Rolling Stones’s Jumping Jack Flash was my favourite tune. The Tramore train was long gone so we boarded the upstairs of a double-decker bus home, usually accompanied by a singsong of popular songs, especially the songs of The Beatles. – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL C O’CONNOR,
Dunmore Road,
Waterford.
Some reflection
Sir, – Kudos to the composition and selection of your “Moment of Reflection” photograph (October 1st).
It says much about modern life, not least that even our contemplative, private moments are now under surveillance from CCTV and others. – Yours, etc,
ULTAN Ó BROIN,
Blackrock,
Co Dublin.
