Sir, – Consumer advocates, employees and regulators are frequently confronted with the issue of proposed company mergers. On the one hand, the increased efficiencies can benefit consumers; on the other hand, mergers may reduce competition and employment. Mergers are generally beneficial for shareholders as they can increase profits through cost-reduction and increased pricing power, and this is where regulators need to step in.
Notably, however, mergers of charities are virtually unheard of, despite the proliferation of such organisations in this small country and the relatively static nature of the problems they are set up to address.
Surely it is time that one of the chief executives proposed some consolidation of charities? A reduction in management, administration and other functions would benefit the underlying causes, yet there is a notable and regrettable lack of focus on efficiency in the charitable sector. I hesitate to use the term non-governmental organisations (NGOs), as taxpayer money is frequently squandered on these personal fiefdoms masquerading as charities.
Unfortunately we are more likely to witness turkeys voting for Christmas. – Yours, etc,
MATTHEW GLOVER,
Lucan,
Co Dublin.
A chara, – Dr Robert Collis, founder of the Cerebral Palsy Association in 1948, told me that when he approached the health funder to assist his work, he was told to set up his clinic first and when it was functioning to come back and seek funding. At another time, the Cerebral Palsy Association requested the Eastern Health Board to nominate two representatives to its board but this was declined. The State funder prefers to keep its distance from the providers through service agreements and does not see the providing charities as equal partners. As the funding relies more and more on the State, the freedom charities used to have to innovate and develop in an independent way lessens. In fact, most charities now try to second-guess what will or will not please the State funder and tender for contracts accordingly. In some cases, this can mean abandoning or seriously modifying their own founding core values. – Yours, etc,
ANTHONY J JORDAN,
Dublin 4.
Sir, – Recent events have demonstrated that there is a “two-tier” health service, but not in the manner usually described. The top tier comprises the core health services, such as the acute hospital services and the general practitioner services, which are under direct HSE management. The second tier consists of the services provided by Console, Rehab, the Central Remedial Clinic, and others. These essential services are regarded as health service “luxuries”, “frills” or “extras ”, and are usually farmed out to the charity sector.
This two-tier attitude is completely wrong, and there is a need to confirm the importance of these services by having the HSE immediately commence direct provision of all health services. – Yours, etc,
GARRY BURY,
Dalkey,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – People who have been bereaved by suicide can find it very difficult to trust that life is safe and reliable. The loss of a child, spouse or parent to suicide fundamentally undermines trust. For clients of Console, it is a double loss to find that the very organisation that was set up to console them has itself breached trust.
There are many failures involved in the Console situation. There was the failure of governance at management and board levels in the charity. There was also a failure by successive governments to regulate charities effectively, and it took the present crisis for the Minister to finally, and belatedly, give the regulator real teeth.
But there has also been a failure on the part of the public, and I include myself here, to ask searching questions of charities and to expect and demand accountability from them.
Charities are generally well-meaning, but they often set out to provide serious services to vulnerable people using public funds. Given the use of public funds and their position of trust, the public has a right to expect of charities more than “meaning well”.
Nobody doubts that many volunteers and professionals working in charities do excellent work, and Console is no exception to this.
But herein lies a problem: when charities do such well-meaning work how can we possibly hold them to account?
There will always be people who breach trust but the best way to minimise their impact is to have a robust culture of questioning and accountability, including in well-meaning charities. We should all be willing to ask even well-meaning organisations to account for their policies and practices. – Yours, etc,
GERRY MYERS,
Course Director,
Postgraduate Integrative
Psychotherapy
Programmes,
Department of Education & Professional Studies,
University of Limerick.