Madam, - I write concerning the means testing for carer's allowance, highlighted in Mark Hennessy's report of December 7th ("Mother of two autistic children accuses Cowen of devaluing carers").
I too am a mother of two children with special needs; and looking after them is a full-time job with no respite. If I advertised for a replacement, the ad would read: "On duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week. No scheduled breaks. No visitors. Must be prepared to put social activities on hold for ever. No holidays and no retirement fund. In fact, no retirement. Lifetime job with no prospects and no pay." Do you think there would be any takers?
Life is hard physically, mentally, emotionally and financially. I have no future to look forward to. But I love my girls and will do my best for them.
My husband works all the hours that God sends to keep us above the breadline. Because of this, we fail to meet the criteria for the means test for carer's allowance. Like many people, we have a huge mortgage and heavy outgoings on the children. A child with special needs costs three times as much as a "typical" child to bring up and care for. I have two, so the cost is equivalent to having six children. In the current financial climate it would be very difficult to bring up six children on two incomes; on one wage, it is almost impossible.
I know I am doing a very worthwhile job with my girls, but there are times when I feel very despondent. This Government fails to recognise me, so I am a nobody. Whenever I have to fill in a form and state my occupation I feel degraded. Being a carer is not a recognised occupation.
I know there have been changes made to the means test in the past, but this did not help me or the thousands of other carers who have a partner who holds a good job or works every hour he can.
My husband works on commission. If he has a bad year, I don't know what we'll do. I don't know how we'll manage when the children reach 16 and no longer qualify for domiciliary care allowance or incapacitated child tax credits. God help us when children's allowance stops. Yes, I know they'll qualify for disability benefit. But what about me? I still will have to keep them, but what with? This is my story.
There are thousands of other carers out there with different caring situations but the same financial needs. I am at my wit's end. - Yours, etc,
(Mrs) SUSAN BYRNE, Saggart Abbey, Dublin 24.
Madam, - For the past eight years I have had reason to write the same post-Budget letter to you. Once again asylum-seekers, who are denied the right to work, have been afforded no increase to the miserly direct provision allowance of €19.10. This is truly unspeakable from a Budget that claimed to protect the vulnerable in straitened times - and it is made even worse by the Minister for Social Welfare's claim that the €9.60 allowance helps ensure "that the rights and welfare of their children are protected".
If the Ministers for Finance, Justice and Social Welfare don't recognise this scandal, what's the point in having a National Anti-Poverty Strategy, a Cabinet Sub-Committee on Social Inclusion and a Minister for Integration? - Yours, etc,
BRENDAN HENNESSY, Rathcoursey, Midleton, Co Cork.
Madam, - David Adams is wrong to argue that the problem of corruption in poor countries, and the challenges that it presents to poor people and donors alike, are not discussed in the Irish media (Opinion, December 7th). This problem is probably the most publicly discussed aspect of Ireland's aid programme.
By presenting corruption as the only accountability problem facing Irish aid spending, Mr Adams lets the Government off the hook for an appalling decision announced by Finance Minister Brian Cowen only two days before his piece appeared in this paper.
In the Budget, Mr Cowen announced his outrageous decision to provide €90 million to the World Bank over three years from 2009. This is in spite of the fact that justice campaigners in Ireland and around the globe have been calling on Ireland and other rich governments to stop supporting the World Bank because of its irresponsible practice of attaching economic policy conditions to its aid to poor countries.
This practice allows the World Bank to heavily influence these countries' economic planning. It undermines their peoples' efforts to build democracy and accountability. And it has caused havoc in the lives of poor people.
For example, the World Bank has damaged the livelihoods of cotton farmers in Mali, West Africa, by promoting the liberalisation of the cotton industry. This resulted in 3 million poor farmers receiving 20 per cent less money for their cotton in 2005.
This is why Debt and Development Coalition Ireland is calling on the Brian Cowen to reverse his decision to give €90 million to the World Bank. He should instead re-route this funding to aid mechanisms without economic conditions. - Yours, etc,
NESSA NÍ CHASAIDE, Co-ordinator, Debt and Development Coalition Ireland, All Hallows, Dublin 9.