Sir, – As one of the many non-homeowning [and unlikely to be any time soon] taxpayers, I have to take issue with James Beard’s sense of entitlement with regard to the Government mica redress scheme and related Ministers’ public announcements (Letters, June 16th).
While I sympathise with the plight of the affected homeowners I can’t help but feel that the huge transfer of public funds from less well-off citizens to wealthier cohorts stinks of cynicism.
The affected homeowners could have purchased latent/structural defects buildings insurance which would have responded to the mica/pyrite issues but they chose not to. If I choose not to buy renters’ insurance and my rented home is burgled, can I hold the Government responsible for my losses because it didn’t do enough to stamp out crime. – Yours, etc,
CIAN CARLIN,
A lot has changed for US women since 2016. What does that mean for Kamala Harris?
Forty years of the Dart: ‘Dealing with the public is one of the hardest things anyone can do’
Mark Francis: Acoustic Oceans review – A fascinating development in the Irish artist’s decades-spanning career
Fake phone calls, meeting pretend-presidents and being ambushed by your parents on TV: The rituals of All-Ireland week
Carlingford,
Co Louth.