John Crown (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I raised an issue last week which was not exactly dealt with. Given the torrent of issues that arose, it was one that was somehow skipped over but I would like to remind the Leader of it. A medical journalist and practitioner contacted me to state that following a piece he had written in a national newspaper in which he was, as are many people - I understand there are two sides to the argument - critical of the apparent policy of the HSE to alter its practices with respect to the issuing of medical cards, although I know it is denied that there is such a policy, he received a legally threatening letter from a public relations spokesman of the HSE. This is entirely inappropriate. There should never be a situation where lawyers or public relations people acting on behalf of a publicly funded body that is answerable to the public as individuals and through the press and Parliament can state that the reputation of that body is such that it would need to be defended by legal means or legal threats. I do not believe anybody should be forced to back down from a position they have taken against the corporate body under such a threat. It is entirely different if a named individual has his or her reputation in some way sullied. They have appropriate means of redress available to them. It may be appropriate that such redress in circumstances where they have been acting on behalf of their public body is funded by the public. However, the body itself should not be immune from criticism. The way for a body to deal with criticism is to set the facts out as it sees them and let the public decide in a democracy or if the criticism is valid, act on it and make the necessary corrections in public policy.

I am very troubled by this development. In previous contributions here, I have said that I believe there should be no public relations companies working anywhere in the public service. The public servants should do their own public relations and act on their own record. Their record should speak for itself. Senior public servants, civil servants and officials of Government agencies should in rotation have responsibility for dealing with queries from the press and the public. It is singularly inappropriate that public money is spent in this way.

I propose an amendment to the Order of Business to ask one of the many very honourable Members for Mayo, the Taoiseach, to attend the Chamber today to clarify his intentions with respect to Seanad reform. I found myself in a welter of confusion when I read the contents of the various contributions made in the Dáil during Leaders' Questions yesterday. It appears the Taoiseach is telling us that the Government deserves praise for being the first Government to implement the seventh amendment to the Constitution voted for by the people in 1979. I remind him that he never intended to implement the seventh amendment. He intended to abolish the entire institution. He was given what all of us believe was a resounding mandate, not a walloping, to reform the Seanad to make it a Chamber based on universal suffrage. I formally propose an amendment to the Order of Business to extend to him a very polite invitation to come in today and perhaps clarify some of the issues he brought up yesterday.