THE Kerry Person of the Year is a very prestigious award that any Kerry person would be both thrilled and delighted to achieve.
The first person so honoured was Dr. Michael Carmody from the Tarbert/Moyvane area. Michael did trojan work and the award was recognition for his great contribution to life. The year of the first award was 1979. Here now is the complete list:
1979 Dr. Michael Carmody.
1980 Sr Stanislaus Kennedy
1981 Pat Roche 1982 Pat O Connell 1983 Eamon Kelly. 1984 Pat Spillane. 1985 Con Houlihan. 1986 Mick Dwyer.
1987 Bryan MacMahon.
1988 Denis Brosnan. 1989 J.B. Keane. 1990 Padraig Moriarty. 1991 Brendan Kennelly.
1992 Father Pat Aherne.
1993 John Curran 1994 Patrick Culligan. 1995 Ned O Shea.
1996 Sr Stanislaus Kennedy.
1997 Michael O Muircheartaigh.
1998 Mick O Connell.
1999 Dick Spring.
2000 P·idí O Sé.
2001 Brian O Mahony.
Only one active sports person that is somebody that was still playing the game of his choice got the award and that was Pat Spillane in 1984.
Only one politician got there Dick Spring in
1999. One person won the award twice Sister Stanislaus Kennedy. Only one priest made the list Fr Pat Aherne.
Two brothers made it Padraig Moriarty and his brother Michael O Muircheartaigh.
It is quite an interesting list no matter how you inspect it.
This year there is another strong case for an active sportsman to win the award and that is Jim Culloty.
His magnificent Gold Cup and Grand National double is a rare achievement and Jim is the first Kerryman to have brought it off.
Either race, on its own, would be quite an achievement the double though is something special and I ll be very surprised if Jim is over-looked.
Looking over the list I m quite surprised at one omission and if Jim Culloty is honoured for this year, as he should be, the omission cannot be rectified for another year at least.
Yes it is hard to believe that a Kerryman who has reached the top of the tree in a demanding and prestigious field has missed out in being selected.
That happens to be the case with Maurice O Connell, the man from Moyvane who was the boss in the Central Bank which is no mean achievement. Now, after stepping down from the post, Maurice, at the age of 66, and two other former senior civil servants Dermot Quigley and Kevin Bonner have been asked to vet next years spending estimates.
In a very interesting profile on the man in The Irish Times (September 7, Emmet Oliver states:
"With his thick-rimmed glasses and wild wisps of hair, he may look like a harmless country uncle, but make such a misjudgement at your peril, say sources."
"He knows a thing or two about cuts, having joined the Department of Finance in 1962. "He s been through more hair shirts than most people have been through suits," one person said this week.
His experience includes the oil crisis of the 1970s, the spending splurge of the late 1970s, the austerities of the early 1980s, the post-1987 recovery, the currency crisis, the rampant 1990s boom, and the introduction of the euro. O Connell, first as a senior civil servant in the Department of Finance and then as the Governor of the Central Bank, has seen them all."
"While many bankers are all cigar smoke and brandy, O Connell lists his hobbies as gardening and watching Kerry play.
"Devoid of vanity" is one description used of him. During his time at the Central Bank he dined in the staff restaurant and did away with the executive dining room. His third-level education in the classics means he expresses himself, at least on paper, with great clarity and purpose, and politicians over the years have found it easy to work with him.
Ray MacSharry, finance minister in the Fianna F·il minority Government of the late 1980s, was said to be a particularly big fan."
So there you have it a briefing on at least two contenders for this year s Kerry Person of the Year award.
War against Saddam should be a last resor
The general consensus is still very anti war
IS Saddam Hussein another Adolf Hitler? Well if he is and time will reveal all in due course then Tony Blair is shaping like another Winston Spencer Churchill. The big debate ongoing right now is whether Iraq should be invaded or left alone. Nobody really wants war and that sentiment alone would rule out an invasion.
But President George W. Bush seems keen to have Hussein removed at all costs he seems to have got a staunch ally in Blair and the world is watching in a state of unease that is not good for the morale.
The Tablet, that fine international Catholic weekly, marks out the situation fairly clearly. Here is the opening salvo from its leader of September 7 headed Tony Blair s Greatest Test :
"Odds against an Anglo-American war with Iraq shortened considerably this week, after a strong-minded performance from Tony Blair at a press conference in his Sedgefield constituency. He spoke like a man driven by the courage of his convictions above all that the United States was right to be determined to stop Saddam Hussein by every means possible, and that Britain must stand at its side."
Now, here are two opposing views as to whether or not Iraq should be invaded and Saddam Hussein ousted from power once and for all.
The Independent states in its September 11 editorial headed A Day To Remember, A Day To Reflect, A Day To Mourn, But Also A Day To Resist The Clamour For War :
"If anniversaries are used to give meaning to events, then today s is in danger of acquiring one that has almost nothing to do with what happened a year ago. The attempt by George Bush and Tony Blair to use the events of 11 September to stoke up the war fever against Iraq is deeply disingenuous. The Bush administration has tried unsuccessfully to link al-Qa ida with Saddam Hussein. Mr. Blair credits us with a little more intelligence by trying to make an argument of principle.
But his claim that the attack on the US makes the case for pre-emptive action generally is an intellectual conjuring trick .
There is no beating about the bush (with apologies to George W.). In the Sunday Express leader of September 8, headed: War With Saddam Is The Only Way To Preserve Peace . Here are some extracts:
"In 1939 Britain was divided about taking up arms against Hitler. Now, looking back, there seems to be overwhelming justification for the war that made the world a safer place. We fervently believe that after we have won the war against Saddam we will feel the same.
"However, there is one vital difference between now and 1939 Hitler did not have nuclear bombs. Today, Iraq presents far more danger to us than the Luftwaffe in
1940.
"We are reminding you of history s lesson because we want our children and grandchildren to live in a safer world. There will be painful times ahead but we will be living through them for their sake. By going to war against Iraq we can lift the shadow that hangs over the next generation.
War with Iraq is dangerous but not to go to war is more dangerous. Peace is so precious that sometimes, to preserve it, democratic nations have to go to war."
In an article in The Times Cardinal Murphy O Connor lays down tough conditions for Mr. Blair to pass. He has to provide "persuasive, preferably incontro-vertible, evidence" that the threat posed by Iraq is "both grave and imminent" and that "the regime must change itself or be changed". Not only must be persuade the British of t his, the cardinal urges, but also the United Nations which effectively means winning a new Security Council resolution.
And then the Prime Minister has to show that a war with Iraq, even if pursued to a satisfactory outcome, will really make the world a better place. These are not conditions Mr. Blair will find easy to meet, though opinion is still volatile and could yet move his way as events unfold.
The consensus seems to be anti war. At the prayer service in St. Mary s Cathedral in Killarney on September 11 to commemorate all who perished on September 11, 2001 and also for all victims of violence during the past year, Fr Gearoid Walsh also came out against war.
Yes, I have a feeling that war against Saddam Hussein should be the last resort and an invasion of Iraq is not merited for the time being at least.
