MINISTERS VENT THEIR FRUSTRATION OVER ‘CRACKED DECISION-MAKING’
THE Taoiseach allowed ministers to air their dissatisfaction with how the Covid Government is being run at a four-and-a-half hour Cabinet meeting on Friday.
Members vented over the two-metre social distancing rule along with contested guidance limiting meetings to a maximum of two hours.
‘For starters, it was made clear to us that this two-hour limit is meaningless as some of us were together in various rooms for four-and-a-half hours,’ one minister said.
‘But it was the most fractious meeting we have had yet. People have been going back to their constituencies and speaking to the public and business owners and are realising how cracked much of this decision-making is. This meeting heard the two-metre social distancing rule being taken apart. If the WHO advises one metre and we have two metres, doesn’t it now call our whole decision- making process into question?’
Another added: ‘There was far more questioning and criticism of NPHET and the senior civil servants and it was clear that many feel too much power has been ceded.’ Labour leader Alan Kelly says there needs to be more transparency in how NPHET and the Senior Officials Group make decisions and has tabled parliamentary questions about both. He says he has received Dáil replies from Health Minister Simon Harris about the manner in which officials were appointed to NPHET, which are ‘not satisfactory’.
‘Democratic transparency is needed more than ever and I’m not seeing that in regard to how decisions are being made,’ Mr Kelly told the MoS. ‘My track record shows that I 100% support public health advice but we do need to see details in relation to decision
making, particularly in regard to NPHET and how their members are put in place, how minutes are not being agreed on time and also how critical decisions are being made.
The balance between NPHET and the Government and that pendulum as regards as who is making the decisions isn’t very clear.
‘We have confusion regarding a range of issues. I also want to see greater transparency about who is on the Senior Officials Group – what role they have, how their advice has confused a number of decisions.’