From the Irish Times report

Mr Gormley said: “The work will allude to the human body as a dynamic interconnected matrix evoking the collective body, which is in itself in dynamic relation to the movement of people in the street and across the new Seán O’Casey Bridge.”

The sculpture is expected to use previously unused construction techniques to build the 48-metre-high structure and carry its weight.

According to the authority, the work will be “a signpost for the realignment of Dublin’s epicentre eastwards”. In other words, they want to move the “city centre” to the docklands, as a symbol of the development and the large numbers of people moving in to the area. The sculpture “will read as a drawing against the changing light of the sky, within an area of Dublin that has low-rise buildings on both sides of the river”.

From the DDDA press release

Paul Maloney, Chief Executive of the Docklands Authority, said that the announcement comes at an important time in the Docklands project. “The delivery of the Docklands Arts Strategy is now well on its way with the appointment of Antony Gormley for this sculptural commission, closely following the commencement on site of the new Grand Canal Theatre and the commitment of a site for our national theatre, the Abbey at George’s Dock.”

The Docklands Authority plans to lodge a planning application for the work before the end of the year.  Subject to planning permission, construction is likely to start during 2008 and, once on site, the work will take approximately eight months to build and will cost in the region of €1.6 million.

A Dublin-based contractor capable of delivering this imaginative and ground breaking work is yet to be appointed. Antony Gormley and Arup Engineers are actively searching at this time for the necessary construction skills and technologies to enable them to deliver the project.

By Alex Kane

“Is there any point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”
“Yes, to the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”
“The dog did nothing in the night-time.”
“That was the curious incident,” remarked Sherlock Holmes.

So, viewed from that perspective, what are we to make of the curious incident of the Rev William McCrea’s unexpected bark, published in the News Letter on July 18th, when he called upon people to “celebrate our victory over the IRA”? Was it a Road to Damascus moment; was it a mea culpa; was it a statement of the “bleedin’ obvious” for some slow learners in the DUP; was it a rhetorical flourish to justify DUP participation in what appears to be a remarkably cosy relationship with Sinn Fein? Or, to be utterly cynical, was it merely the DUP deploying one of its most hardline figures to flag up an official and ongoing softening-up of their traditional stance on both Sinn Fein and the IRA?

I only ask, because McCrea’s analysis dovetails very neatly into an opinion I have been expressing for a number of years in this column: namely, that Sinn Fein’s day “isn’t coming after all,” that the IRA “didn’t spend thirty-five years on a terror campaign merely to put former and existing members into a partitionist government,” and that the only new danger to the Union will be from “the blindness or stupidity of unionists themselves,”—-particularly those who now seek to engage with Sinn Fein’s Unionist Outreach project.

It simply strikes me as very “curious” that the Rev McCrea should choose this moment (no doubt sanctioned by DUP HQ) to agree with the opinions of an unabashed and unapologetic Ulster Unionist. And judging from the letters, texts and e-mails to this newspaper, along with private conversations I have had with DUP members and supporters, I am not the only one who is surprised by this latest manifestation of what can only be described as New DUP. Let’s be honest, short of hoisting the Tricolour outside the First Minister’s home, there’s not much more that the DUP could do to make Sinn Fein feel comfortable! 

But when all is said and done, the Rev McCrea is absolutely right; the IRA has been defeated. Let me give you some quotes from the IRA’s General Army Orders. “No member of the IRA may be a member of a political party which recognises the partition institutions of government as sovereign authorities for the Irish people.” “A Volunteer shall not swear or pledge himself/herself in any way to refrain from using arms or other methods of struggle to overthrown British rule in Ireland.” “Participation in Stormont or Westminster and in any other subservient parliament, if any, is strictly prohibited.” “The IRA will…support the establishment of, and uphold, a lawful government in sole and absolute control of the Republic (of all Ireland).”

I don’t actually know why it took the DUP so long to recognise that fact, when it has been palpably apparent since that moment, in 1996, when Sinn Fein joined the Forum and accepted that all future negotiations would involve and require formal changes to the IRA’s constitution and General Army Convention. But as soon as the DUP and Sinn Fein became co-equals in government it was inevitable that the DUP would have to find some means of justifying their new relationship. A bit of bluster from someone like William McCrea must have seemed a good idea at the time; particularly if it could be pulled off when the Assembly was in recess and great swathes of unionism were holidaying abroad!

What has become clear, though, is that elements within the DUP, within the Free Presbyterian Church and within their long-time core vote, are not convinced by news of supposed victories and suspected conversions. They are not convinced, because the DUP in general and Ian Paisley in particular has spent the past thirty-five years telling them that successive British governments were a bunch of spineless softies who did nothing but appease the IRA. And they are not convinced, because the DUP is now asking them to believe that a bit of tinkering with the Belfast Agreement, that “treacherous and one-way-ticket to a United Ireland,” means that a Unionist utopia is presently under construction (without a provision for republican shrines).

It would be wrong, however, to assume that the DUP will nosedive into some sort of internal or electoral meltdown. While they are obviously preparing the ground and flying kites for further shifts of stance, I would be surprised if they didn’t remain a united party. Local media and business consensus is broadly supportive, along with that of national and international opinion. And I don’t detect any great anti-power-sharing rebellion anywhere; not least because most unionists, even if reluctantly, accept that there isn’t a viable or available alternative to the present set-up.

It will be interesting to see what Jim Allister chooses to do. I would be surprised if he didn’t opt to defend his Euro seat in 2009 as an independent; and there are rumours in the undergrowth that he may try and cobble together a team of candidates for a General Election expected in 2008. But again, I suspect that the days of independent unionists are long gone. Meaning, of course, that the ongoing downward trend of the overall pro-Union vote will continue; an issue that has concerned me for many years, now.

Anyway, back to the Rev McCrea. However he and New DUP Central may try and spin his analysis, the fact remains that he, and they, have radically overhauled their thinking and embraced the political landscape fashioned by the UUP, SDLP and Sinn Fein itself, in 1998. Welcome aboard guys, albeit very belatedly. And how about an equally belated apology to those poor suckers who voted for you in the expectation that you would give them something entirely different? Or maybe, just maybe, an apology to those of us you condemned for predicting that this is exactly what you would do if you got into the driving seat!

First published in the Newsletter on 30th July 2007

Darren, who works as a joiner with local firm the Clarke Group, stressed he got on well with those within his own club and with people in his local community. “It just came to a head. Something bad (was said) on the field: ‘You’re a black c***.’ Then another ran by and said: ‘It’s the truth, you’re nothing but that’.”

And

Mr Graham, whose two-year-old daughter is being raised as a Catholic, said: “I’ve been getting it from opponents and supporters. It’s been happening up through the ranks but not really bad until I got to senior level, when I was 18.

“It’s definitely because I’m a Protestant. No-one else on the pitch would get it half as bad. I’ve been told Protestants shouldn’t be allowed in the GAA. I know it’s a minority, but it’s happening. Everybody knows it, but I never pushed it any higher. What’s the point? Nothing is going to be done about it.”

The achievement of the British military was to fight the IRA to a stalemate in order to make space for politics. This week, General Nick Parker, the head of the army in Northern Ireland, rightly said that the military’s achievement was to make “a significant contribution to the security in Northern Ireland that has allowed other people to make the difference through politics, social programs, and economics.”

The role of politics is evident in the silence that has greeted the end of Operation Banner. Nobody does military ceremonies like the British. But this week there were no bugles playing, no ceremonial striking of the Union Jack, no mention of the 763 British soldiers who died in Northern Ireland. In the zero sum calculus that is the hallmark of divided societies, this ceremony might be perceived as a loss for the loyalist population of Ulster, so it did not happen. The government of Gordon Brown made no effort to exploit this event for political advantage just as Tony Blair refused to exploit the decommissioning of the IRA’s arsenal two years ago. There was no hint then of triumphalism, no talk of victory, because that would appear as a loss for the republican community. Partisan politics took a back seat to political progress.

http://www.sitepoint.com/dustmeselectors/

Once upon a time, we could have fooled ourselves into believing that such practices were alien to the Irish sporting culture- the experience of celebrating Olympic Gold medals in 1996 and 2004 which were subsequently stripped or devalued due to suspicions or actual use of banned substances have put paid to that.

The answer of how to deal with the all pervasive drug culture continues to evade sporting bodies, who perhaps once could have been forgiven for naivety or incompetence, but who today are soberly engaged in a technological battle to keep up-to-date with the drug cheats.

Americans were the first to bring statistics into the sporting arena, with stats for every possible action on the sporting field (we can thank Sky Sports for bringing football up to par in that regard.) But the greatest record of them all in American sports- and that which brought international recognition to the legendary baseball figure, Babe Ruth- is on the verge of being broken this week. The problem, of course, is that the new record holder is strongly suspected of being a drug cheat.

Barry Bonds, like so many baseball sluggers of his generation, has been alleged to have been using steroids during his baseball career, linked with the now infamous BALCO scandal. A plea bargain deal prevented the full details emerging from the case, but enough information has leaked out to implicate Bonds and many others.

During his career he has amassed an incredible 754 Home Runs to date and broken many other records in the process. The all-time Home Run record is 755 Home Runs, held by Hank Aaron, who surpassed Babe Ruth’s 714 Homers in 1974.

The pursuit of the Record has divided America and provoked much discussion about how to judge the achievements of Barry Bonds and those of many others who have been found/ suspected to have been using steroids throughout what was naively believed to have been the halcyon days for Home Run hitting in the 1990s (other ‘greats’ residing beneath dark clouds of suspicion today from what is now referred to as the ‘Steroid Era’ include Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire and Jose Canseco, whose status in Baseball would be akin to Thierry Henry, Christiano Ronaldo and Frank Lampard today in English soccer.)

Sport has changed, and changed utterly.

There were main factors:

- a natural change of 8,300 people (22,700 births and 14,400 deaths);

- estimated net migration into Northern Ireland from Great Britain of 900 people; and

- estimated net international migration into Northern Ireland from outside the UK of 9,000 people.

Population growth due to migration (+9,900 people) was the highest ever observed and for the first time was larger than natural growth (+8,300 people). In the decade to 2004 the annual rate of population increase was around 7,000 persons (0.4%) each year. The 2005 and 2006 increases in population are significantly larger at 14,000 people (0.8%) and 17,000 people (1.0%) respectively.

Meanwhile, in the Republic, CSO has released their birth rate stats, and the rate seems to be back on the rise, though it remains slightly below natural replacement levels:

Women in the Republic are continuing to have more children than women in most EU countries, despite high childcare costs and record numbers of women in employment.

Irish women have an average of 1.9 children, compared with Finland (1.8), Germany (1.3) and Poland (1.2). Only France has a higher fertility rate (1.94).

Sociologists say the increase in Ireland’s fertility rate is strongly linked to the economy and the abundance of jobs. Birth rates in Ireland declined quickly during the 1980s. However, the figure began to rise in the mid-1990s, in parallel with economic growth.

While Ireland’s fertility rate is high, it is just under the level which would maintain population levels in the long run (2.1).

Deirdre Donnelly, the Press Officer for the Fermanagh County Board GAA, told the ‘Herald’ it was the first time she had heard of that form of abuse: “And, I know from talking to other officials, they have never been aware of it. But, certainly, if individuals feel there is an issue, they should bring it to their club and the club should take it to County Board.”

Darren Graham is adamant: ‘unless there is something really done about it and the County Board realise that this is all happening, I am definite, I am not putting on the shirt again’.

For the record, Rule 7(b) of the GAA constitution states clearly: ‘the Association shall be non-sectarian’.

And, in Febraury this year, the GAA President, Nicky Brennan, in the course of an interview for the Church of Ireland Gazette, insisted there was nothing wrong with the GAA that would stop Protestant people joining. Indeed, he suggested the only intimidation might come from their own community.

It begs the question that if the GAA doesn’t actually know this stuff is going on: is this just the tip of a very large iceberg?

And Christ little Katherine Aiken is dead,
and Mrs McLaughlin is pierced through the head.
Meanwhile to Dungiven the killers have gone,
and they’re finding it hard to get through on the phone

http://com3.devnet.re3.yahoo.com/yslow/

Chief executive Maurice Pratt told The Irish Times that the predicted 35 per cent fall in profit was not just down to a drop in the volume of cider it has sold over the last six months, but also reflected spending on increased manufacturing capacity and on marketing. “We have capital expenditure this year of €170 million,” he said.

Mr Pratt acknowledged yesterday that this week’s warm weather has arrived too late for the company.

The rapid expansion of Magner’s cider in Britain has been the main growth accelerator at the group over the last two years.

He explained that the May to July summer period is key in building sustained sales as it is during this time frame that it recruits most of its new customers.

However, he could not say if the impact of losing this key period would last into next year. “We have not given any guidance on that.

“Our expected growth did not materialise and we need to see just how the first half concludes before we can give any future guidance. That’s where we are right now.”

Malachi O’Doherty:

My sense is that some of us are talking about the army as though it were a change in the weather, as though it happened for no particular reason.

The IRA and the British Army of the early seventies were almost made for each other. That the army came in wasn’t just a unionist demand, Gerry Fitt had asked them to come in as well.

But the army came in ineptly led, and with many of their forces undisciplined, who were drunk and rude on the streets to young men like me. And provocative in their behaviour.

And then you had the organisation of the Provisional IRA determined to have a revolution. They had seen that the Civil Rights movement had invalidated the RUC, if you like, and they thought they could push on, and they were right in this calculation, to bring down the Stormont government. They brought it down within two years.

But for Gerry Kelly to be evasive about mistakes by the IRA. When the IRA bombed, albeit by accident, the Short Strand, an area they were committed to defending, and killed eight people in one bomb. A two minute warning, for the bomb in the Abercorn. Half the members of the IRA in the early seventies who died were killed by own goal bombs that went off, because kids who knew no better were sent out to drive bombs into the centre of Belfast to find a parking space for them with timers they had no access to.

So we have to be very careful about talking about the Army as if the Army just came by some determination to invade and oppress the Catholic people of Ireland.

Gerry Kelly:

I haven’t been evasive at all about the issue. [Malachi interrupts: Here you go again] What I said was.. Well, if you’d let me talk, that’s your usual response to these issues. You’d think you were ashamed of being a nationalist.

What I was saying, and I was saying it very clearly, so let me say it again, just in case Malachi wasn’t listening, and I was listening to him very carefully. The combatant forces, that includes the IRA, and I was in the IRA, made mistakes. They were wrong in some of the things that they did. And it was a war. Now I heard a British general on today saying it wasn’t a war, and we argue over whether it was a conflict or a war, but the fact is that over three thousand people have been killed. The fact is that it could have come to a conclusion much earlier. The fact is that the British government decided to deal with this as a security problem, as opposed to trying to deal with it in a conflict resolution situation.

Now it took well over two decades to get to that point. As a politician, as a Sinn Fein member I can say, that you can take the antecedents of the peace process way back into the eighties when we have been trying to bring this conflict to an negotiated solution and it took a very long time to do that. But we are where we are, and we have managed to put together a power sharing situation to deal with the issues of equality there are many issues ahead of us yet, but we have to the point which in my opinion we should have come to in the…. [Dunseith talks over the end]

http://robgoodlatte.com/2007/07/31/syncotype-your-baselines/

btw, in case you missed the memo.. apparently I’m Statler or Waldorf.