Madam, - When Noel Whelan rails against the "absurdity" of the press coverage given to the dropping of Prof John Crown from the Late Late Show panel (Opinion, November 17th), he puts himself in the camp of those who would seek to stifle debate on the health issue.
The Government is understandably sensitive to criticism of its record in providing cancer services. The reason that the Late Late Show had difficulty in producing a balanced panel was the refusal of the Government to put forward a spokesperson, thus precipitating the RTÉ decision to drop Prof Crown. This action might have given rise to less suspicion if Noel Curran, the director of television, had displayed an equal knowledge of the previously published views of John Waters and Eoghan Harris when they were allowed turn the Late Late Show into an uncontested Fianna Fáil party political broadcast less than a week before polling day in the general election.
Noel Whelan's remark that the debate on health issues "got even crazier this week" reflects the tactic in Government and HSE circles to portray those who attempt to expose the shortcomings of the health service as irrational mavericks who oppose change.
The Taoiseach's intemperate behaviour in the Dáil, to which Mr Whelan refers, was not a spur-of-the-moment outburst in the midst of heated argument. The fact is he was apparently in possession of some form of information, Kremlin-like dossier or otherwise, on the financial affairs of Prof Crown and Mr Maurice Neligan, which he was using in a calculated way to create the impression that their criticism of Government policy was motivated by self-interest. It was an attempt on Mr Ahern's part to divert attention from their authoritative criticisms of the health service. In the light of the detail on the earnings of the two consultants apparently contained in Mr Ahern's notes it was not unreasonable for Prof Crown to perceive a degree of intimidation in the Taoiseach's reference to unused material.
RTÉ has by no means established its credentials as an unbiased broadcaster and the fact that a person high in RTÉ management chose to intervene directly in the selection of a panel for an individual show would certainly raise concern about the station's editorial processes.
It is perhaps predictable that Noel Whelan would take a benign and credulous view of Government and RTÉ behaviour in this matter but both organisations have earned public distrust and it is a good thing that we have some commentators willing to question them, even at the risk of being viewed as "crazy" by your columnist. - Yours, etc,
JOE AHERN, Hermitage Close, Rathfarnham, Dublin 16.
Madam, - Noel Whelan believes that "a perception was created that RTÉ had bowed to Government pressure" because of the "tall tale" of the dropping of Dr Crown from the Late Late Show. He claims that this "raises concerns about editorial decision-making in some newspapers".
Like Noel Whelan, I see many issues on which I could disagree with newspapers. They are, however, private firms. RTÉ is not. It is funded to a large extent by a licence fee on the basis that it should provide a public service.
When questions are asked about the exclusion of certain opinions from debates on matters of public interest on RTÉ, these issues should be aired in the media. The fact that Noel Whelan finds such discussions "crazy" is neither here nor there. - Yours, etc,
A. LEAVY, Shielmartin Drive, Sutton, Dublin 13.