Madam, - Charles Haughey has broken his silence and seeks to defend his record. Your edition of September 17th reports that he is proud of his contribution to the arts.
Seeming to take credit for Temple Bar, he declares that "most great cities have at least one area. . .where creative people congregate, where there is an atmosphere of relaxed non-conformism, with theatres, studios, galleries, cafés, pubs, restaurants and a general dedication to joie de vivre".
(It is a pity such noble thoughts were not to the fore as his councillors rezoned north and west Dublin without a thought for the urban blight being created for the unfortunate new residents.)
I am a resident of Temple Bar and it is all too clear that Mr Haughey has not been back there since he promoted legislation granting very generous tax breaks to the private developers of the area.
Before the legislative intervention, the area was genuinely bohemian as cheap short leases were granted by CIÉ to artists and others in buildings they planned to demolish to build a transport hub.
An Taisce proposed that the area be dedicated to cultural purposes and that it be called Temple Bar. Mr Haughey's plan certainly saved the area from demolition. But the artists, studios, small, cheap cafés, and old, charming pubs have disappeared, priced out of the market by superpubs and expensive restaurants lured in by the tax incentives.
Only a fraction of the residential component was ever completed and many of the cultural venues are shuttered up - the Design Yard, the Viking Centre and Arthouse to name a few.
Temple Bar is now almost exclusively a drinking quarter and the spirit which abounds is more "joie de boire" than "joie de vivre".
It is an example of bad planning where the main beneficiaries were, and continue to be, developers.
I am sure that Mr Haughey can be proud of some of his legacy but he should be slow to claim credit for a flawed project. - Yours, etc.,
COLM MAC EOCHAIDH, Fownes Street Upper, Temple Bar, Dublin 2.