Madam, - Adjectives such as "fully" or "adequately" briefed are used in reports such as the Travers report. They give wriggle room but, in the Travers case, they serve to avoid the obvious conclusion, which is that the politicians were briefed about the problem. In fact they had been briefed about it for years.
Acts of omission are just as bad as acts of commission. The top administrator has fallen for his failures to act and his Department has been vilified for its alleged maladministration. Yet the politicians of all the main parties who held posts of responsibility in this affair appear to get off scot-free.
As for paying for the débâcle, compensation, if any, should be funded over a long period and not visited on the backs of the taxpayers of 2005 and 2006 only. One source of funding would be to abolish the unconstitutionally established offices of Ministers of State, which, indeed, cannot constitutionally have any ministerial functions delegated to them. In this way, part of the cost would be borne by our politicians. - Yours, etc.,
RAY DOLLARD, College Green, Summerhill, Wexford.
Madam, - I share Carol Coulter's view that the Travers report should start a real debate on political accountability. Successive governments have let the people down on the nursing home issue. The buck should stop with the Ministers involved.
I am also amazed at the silence of Mr Callely, the Minister with responsibility for the elderly at the time. I raised this issue in the Dáil a few times but the silence was deafening from all sides.
Of course we need radical reform of our Civil Service but we also need accountability and responsibility from our Ministers. There also should be a major investigation into the role of special advisers and spin doctors. Our citizens deserve to hear the facts on all issues. This is not happening at the moment and truth is being severely tainted by spin. - Yours, etc.,
FINIAN McGRATH TD, (Independent), Dáil Éireann, Dublin 2.
Madam, - Drapier's comments last Saturday on the implications of compensating nursing-home patients for the unlawful costs to which they were subjected epitomises what is wrong with the attitudes of political and media insiders to issues of importance to the powerless and vulnerable in our society.
Most commentary on the issue in our main newspapers and broadcasting outlets as confined to an assessment of whether or not "a few punches were landed" on some politician by another politician. Drapier also wondered if Micheál Martin had "shipped water".
Political and administrative institutions which represent all of us have been found by the highest court in the land wrongfully to have deprived vulnerable people of billions. Yet all Drapier and his ilk can contribute to the debate is an assessment of the damage to one politician's reputation. To add insult to injury he proclaims that he "will silently applaud" a decision not to compensate some of the people from whom money was taken illegally.
I assume that Drapier is a public representative who is involved in framing and passing legislation. Should he not be advocating the upholding of such laws? He implies that some of those claiming compensation will be indulging in some "grubby" transaction. Would he say the same if his own expenses were stopped illegally?
With such thoughtless contributions as Drapier's to an issue of such importance is it any wonder that politicians are held in low esteem? - Yours, etc.,
A. LEAVY, Shielmartin Drive, Dublin 13.