Dear Editor,
As a former public servant and legal practitioner, I am all too aware that the State does not have a legal obligation to contest every lawsuit brought against it to its last breath. My years representing my clients in numerous court cases while serving in the government have made me privy to the State’s frequent defence of indefensible allegations.
This is often based on solicitor’s recommendations, which don’t always hold water, or because neither a minister nor an entire department wants to concede where they’ve gone wrong, missed the point, or simply failed. This issue has come to a head with the denial of the maximum carer’s allowance to a mother who selflessly dedicates her time to care for her severely handicapped child.
The tricky family situation outlined in the Mary Carolan’s report unequivocally suggests that the full assistance should indeed be provided. It’s evident that if current provisions under our social welfare laws inhibit such aid, amendments to the existing laws can be enacted to provide a suitable solution. However, the Minister for Social Protection and prime advocate for the alleged “care” amendment to the Constitution has chosen to dig her heels in.
This stubbornness following the referendum utterly compromises any vestige of trust the public has in the government’s highly-publicised sympathy for carers. The decision is bereft of compassion and wisdom since the high legal fees that will be borne by the taxpayers in defense of this morally indefensible act would serve as a significant support for this specific family for a prolonged period.
It reminds me, albeit in a different context, of my direct experience with the wasteful approach of a government led by Fine Gael in defending lawsuits at all tiers of the court system.
There is still an opportunity for the government to reroute its course in the case that is currently before the Supreme Court involving a mother caring for her severely disabled child. And indeed, they should.
Kind regards,
Alan Shatter,
(Ex-minister for Justice, Equality and Defence),
Dublin 16.